David Cone vs Bret Saberhagen: Career Stats Comparison
David Cone has the better career line of the two, leading 7 of the 11 statistical categories compared on this page. David Cone played 1986–2003 as a pitcher; Bret Saberhagen played 1984–2001 as a pitcher.
- ERA (Earned Run Average):
- Earned runs allowed per nine innings pitched: (ER × 9) ÷ IP. The primary measure of pitching effectiveness.
- W (Wins):
- Games credited to a pitcher whose team took a lead it never surrendered while he was the pitcher of record.
- SO (Strikeouts):
- For a batter, times retired on a third strike; for a pitcher, batters retired on a third strike.
- WHIP (Walks and Hits per Inning Pitched):
- Baserunners allowed per inning: (BB + H) ÷ IP. Under 1.00 is elite.
Data updated
David Cone (1986–2003) and Bret Saberhagen (1984–2001) — both came up during the 1980s, so the matchup is a direct one. David Cone compiled 194 wins and 2,668 strikeouts; Bret Saberhagen put up 167 wins and 1,715 strikeouts. The numbers below run them through identical career and rate-stat lenses.
Quick answer
- Who had the better ERA? Bret Saberhagen, with 3.34 to David Cone's 3.46.
- Who won more games? David Cone, with 194 to Bret Saberhagen's 167.
- Who recorded more strikeouts? David Cone, with 2,668 to Bret Saberhagen's 1,715.
- Who had the better WHIP? Bret Saberhagen, with 1.14 to David Cone's 1.26.
- Who pitched more innings? David Cone, with 2,898 to Bret Saberhagen's 2,562.
- Who threw more shutouts? David Cone, with 22 to Bret Saberhagen's 16.
- Who has the higher career Pitcher PIV? Bret Saberhagen, with 53,065 career Pitcher PIV to David Cone's 47,099.
David Cone
Bret Saberhagen
Career Stats Side-by-Side
Every cell below is a career total or career rate. Cells highlighted in green mark the player who leads that line. Lower ERA, WHIP and BB/9 lead; higher K/9 leads. Totals where fewer is not an achievement -- losses, walks and hits allowed -- are left unmarked, because they track how long someone pitched rather than how well. Rate stats are not era-adjusted: compare them with the era in mind, or use the PIV card below, which is.
| Statistic | David Cone | Bret Saberhagen |
|---|---|---|
| Wins | Leads: 194 | 167 |
| Losses | 126 | 117 |
| Games | Leads: 450 | 399 |
| Games Started | Leads: 419 | 371 |
| Complete Games | 56 | Leads: 76 |
| Shutouts | Leads: 22 | 16 |
| Saves | 1 | 1 |
| Strikeouts | Leads: 2,668 | 1,715 |
| Walks | 1,137 | 471 |
| Hits Allowed | 2,504 | 2,452 |
| Home Runs Allowed | 258 | 218 |
| Innings Pitched | Leads: 2,898 | 2,562 |
| ERA | 3.46 | Leads: 3.34 |
| WHIP | 1.26 | Leads: 1.14 |
| K/9 | Leads: 8.28 | 6.02 |
| BB/9 | 3.53 | Leads: 1.65 |
PIV Comparison
By PIV (Player Impact Value), Bret Saberhagen leads David Cone 53,065 to 47,099 — a gap driven primarily by per-season impact (3,122 vs 2,479 per year). PIV adjusts each season to league baselines, so it's the cleanest way to compare careers across eras.
Peak Seasons
The best single seasons each player produced, ranked by ERA among qualified workloads (120+ innings).
David Cone — top 3 seasons by ERA (lower is better)
Bret Saberhagen — top 3 seasons by ERA (lower is better)
Verdict
On the head-to-head card, David Cone leads in wins, strikeouts, K/9, and innings pitched, while Bret Saberhagen owns ERA and WHIP. That doesn't settle the era debate, but on the raw scoreboard the edge goes to David Cone. Note that PIV actually grades Bret Saberhagen ahead, which means David Cone's edge is partly volume. Click through to each profile for the full season-by-season breakdown.
Related Matchups
David Cone vs Bret Saberhagen: Frequently Asked Questions
- Who was better, David Cone or Bret Saberhagen?
- By the career statistics compared on this page, David Cone leads Bret Saberhagen in 7 of 11 categories.
- Who had the better ERA?
- Bret Saberhagen, with 3.34 to David Cone's 3.46.
- Who won more games?
- David Cone, with 194 to Bret Saberhagen's 167.
- Who recorded more strikeouts?
- David Cone, with 2,668 to Bret Saberhagen's 1,715.
- Who had the better WHIP?
- Bret Saberhagen, with 1.14 to David Cone's 1.26.