hall of fame, next vote...

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=halloffame/roundtable/041222

how do you rate the arguments contained herein?

jonathan quayle higgins (j.q. higgins), Wednesday, 22 December 2004 23:29 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

I don't think Andre Dawson, Jim Rice, Lee Smith and Bert Blylevyn were Hall of Famers. Morris, Sandberg, Sutter and Goosage have much better arguments in their favor, but of the lot only Sandberg has to me to have really unimpeachable arguments (i.e. he was clearly the best 2nd basemen of his era and one of the best 2nd basemen ever.) Morris was a monster and at his best (which he was for a large part of 80s) he was one of the best pitchers in baseball, but his numbers aren't incredible and even though that shouldn't matter, it will. Sutter burned out too quick, only seven really great years even though when he was at his height he probably had more impact on any given game than maybe any of these guys. Gossage was around FOREVER and he was also amazing, but I'm not sure he was really as good as Fingers, Eck or Sutter and if he was as good how long he was. That hurts him a little, but really he should be in the hall. I think relievers belong in the Hall, BUT I think they really have to have great #s and either hang around forever at a really high level (like Fingers, Gossage and Riviera) or have had a really respectable career as a starter to boot (like Eckersley).

Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Wednesday, 22 December 2004 23:50 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

For the record I am glad that Blyleven didn't win 300 games, because his "automatic" inclusion on that basis would be even more ridiculous than Sutton's. You get some points for longevity, but the hall really should be reserved for players who were at some point GREAT, not players who just managed to play pretty good for a long period of time.

Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Wednesday, 22 December 2004 23:57 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Here is the link for anyone who hasn't read last years HOF thread.

Hall of Fame Ballot 2004

Bruce Sutter was the pitcher that brought back and popularized the split finger fastball, which considering how popular a pitch it has become in the past 25 years, it is something that he should get some credit.

"Boggs, for instance, is not a classic Hall of Famer, in my eyes, despite his 3,000 hits; he was a very, very good player, but not a dominant player."

Appearantly Buster forgets the mid 80s when Boggs career batting average was at .355 or so, he won 5 of 6 batting titles and his on base percentage was at a SABERMETRIC stoner high. He also won two of those batting titles by more than twenty points! After age 32, he only once hit over .330, but a bunch of players peak around that time in their career. Boggs average with runners on base and the bases loaded is also off the chart.

Oddly enough, I don't think Boggs was quite the same player after that whole scandal with Margo Adams broke. I think opposing teams quit putting chicken on the buffet when Boston was in town or something.

I think it would be interesting to know how many hits Boggs would have put up if he would have been brought up in 81, when he was 21 instead of 24. Boggs always claimed that he was just a good a hitter at 21, but since he played 1b was always behind Yaz in the depth chart and never got the chance to play in the bigs until he learned how to play 3b. He didn't get called up in 84 until they were wracked with injuries, then he hit over .400 for a month or so and stayed in the lineup from then on.

I grew up mostly watching NL baseball, but Boggs was one of my favorite players to follow and watch hit. Maybe not as fearful as some of the great power hitters of his day, but like Tony Gwynn, he was one of those hitters that seemed to dumbfound pitchers on how to get them out.

Earl Nash (earlnash), Thursday, 23 December 2004 01:02 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

The Page 2 discussion was really good.

Earl OTM about Boggs, the guy was an offensive powerhouse.

It's the usual BS with guys like Sandberg -- 2B and 3B are underrepresented positions in the HoF because their offensive numbers aren't at the level of 1B or OF, they're not remembered for being "flashy" like SS, and they're not "on-the-field leaders" like C. Sandberg is a no-brainer.

Gossage should be in, I hear the arguments for Sutter that he wasn't great for as long as some other guys, but a) he was dominant for about the same length of time that Mo Rivera has been (and a lot of people consider him a future HoF player -- yeah, I know Mo's postseason performance is part of that, but still), and b) he INVENTED a pitch, which is a damned significant contribution to the game.

The Blyleven arguments boil down to the fact that he WAS great, but was pitching for bad teams. I think people are wising up to the idea that there are guys like Sutton who are in only because they pitched for good teams.

MindInRewind (Barry Bruner), Thursday, 23 December 2004 01:29 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Rob Neyer's done some great columns on Blyleven, I don't have the time to look for them now ... maybe someone else has a link to them?

MindInRewind (Barry Bruner), Thursday, 23 December 2004 01:29 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Rivera's been dominant for longer than Sutter at this point (by two more years), MIR. And Rivera wouldn't even be mentioned as a future HOFer if it weren't for the postseason stuff.

Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Thursday, 23 December 2004 03:04 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

The funny thing about Morris, as I recall, is that he always seemed to pitch just good enough to stay ahead. If his team had 7 runs he'd give up 6 and if his boys only managed 1 run he'd throw a shut-out. It was the weirdest thing.

Thermo Thinwall (Thermo Thinwall), Thursday, 23 December 2004 03:07 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

The 1984 Tigers never get much call when they talk about great all-time teams, that team didn't really have any "superstars" but they were really deep and talented team. I think Sparky Anderson platooned at about half of the positions. Lance Parrish, Alan Trammell and Lou Whitaker all three also had really good careers and don't get quite the props that they deserve.

That season I remember seeing Jack Morris throw a no hitter on TV against the White Sox as it was the game of the week Saturday Afternoon on NBC. I can remember my dad was working in the garage and coming in every so often to check it out how the game was going, as he joked after the first inning or so wouldn't it be funny if he threw a no hitter.

Earl Nash (earlnash), Thursday, 23 December 2004 03:42 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

>the hall really should be reserved for players who were at some point GREAT, not players who just managed to play pretty good for a long period of time.

But if that were the case, there'd be 80 or 90 members, except for what, 240 now?

By the established standard, Blyleven belongs. If you're "very good" for long enough (BB was in the top 10 in league Adjusted ERA 11 times from '71-89), that's worth 5-6 years of dominance (the peak vs career, Koufax vs Spahn argument). There was some research I read in the last year that showed Bert didn't suffer quite as much from his teammates' inadequacy as generally thought, but it wasn't enough for him to drop off my "ballot."

>The funny thing about Morris, as I recall, is that he always seemed to pitch just good enough to stay ahead.

"I know not seems..." I'll try to find a link for you, Thermo, but someone recently did a study of Morris's career in this regard, and it showed *no* special ability to pitch that way. He threw 1150 fewer innings than Blyleven and his career ERA was only 5% better than the league's (Bert 18%) -- that's not a negligible difference. Morris had a good career, but not a HOFer.

I'd vote for Gossage on greatness and longevity, Sutter on peak and pioneer role, close but unconvinced for Lee Smith. Rest of ballot: Boggs, Sandberg, and TRAMMELL, most deserving SS of that era below Ozzie. Dawson and Rice fall short.

It's sad that the Vets Committee process has obviously been fucked up to the point where they may never elect anyone, as I fear Ron Santo will die before his deserved induction.

Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 23 December 2004 14:52 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

I'll try to find a link for you, Thermo, but someone recently did a study of Morris's career in this regard, and it showed *no* special ability to pitch that way
Well even if that's true & it debunks my theory - it at least means someone else has noticed!

Thermo Thinwall (Thermo Thinwall), Thursday, 23 December 2004 15:32 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

"But if that were the case, there'd be 80 or 90 members, except for what, 240 now?"

I'm not sure that would be worst thing ever actually, but my problem with Blyleven is that during his time he was never really recognized as being one of the best in the game. He wasn't voted to All Star games, he didn't make Cy Young top 10s, he wasn't talked about as being a great pitcher. And I think that hurts him. NOW if the reason why none of those things occurred was that he toiled entirely in obscurity for shitty teams and if he'd been on the Dodgers, the Red Sox, the Yankees and the Reds for those years instead that there would be a complete about face and he'd be considered among the best pitchers of his era, well all I can say geez that's bad luck for Bert, but I think that's a hard argument to make conclusively.

Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Thursday, 23 December 2004 16:17 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

That Bert was named to only 2 All-Star teams just shows how debased that is as a criterion.

MIR, here's a 4-year-old Neyer column on Blyleven... Alex, I think it's conclusive:

http://espn.go.com/mlb/s/2000/1213/943398.html

And he later wrote:

"Blyleven was, over the course of his career, a better pitcher than Ted Lyons or Early Wynn or Bob Lemon or Red Ruffing or Rube Waddell or Red Faber or Catfish Hunter or Lefty Gomez, all of whom are in the Hall of Fame... It's not Blyleven's fault that he generally pitched for unspectacular teams that played in hitter's parks. In fact, Blyleven pitched for 22 seasons, and in only four of those 22 seasons did Blyleven's home ballpark favor the pitcher, statistically..."

And to appeal to the butch old-timers: 242 complete games!

Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 23 December 2004 17:41 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

>he didn't make Cy Young top 10s

Four of 'em (third twice).

http://baseball-reference.com/b/blylebe01.shtml

Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 23 December 2004 17:47 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

When you start out your argument claiming that Blyleven was a better pitcher than Sutton (who wasn't even close to a great pitcher and doesn't deserve to be in the Hall IMO) and Ryan (who was a complete statistical anomaly and does deserve to be in the Hall for that, but was also not a great pitcher) you've already undercut your case tremendously, Rob.

Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Thursday, 23 December 2004 17:58 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Here's the BP article about Jack Morris that attempts to determine where Morris had the ability to pitch to the score:

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=1815

It concludes that there is no evidence to suggest that he could.

MindInRewind (Barry Bruner), Thursday, 23 December 2004 17:59 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

to determine *whether* Morris had the ability to pitch to the score

MindInRewind (Barry Bruner), Thursday, 23 December 2004 17:59 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

I'm not sure how many pitchers in history meet your def of "great," Alex -- let's deal with the Hall you have, rather than the one you wish to have -- but the argument he makes is that Blyleven was better than several HOF pitchers, and comparable to *many* others. And he was.

That's the article I meant, MIR, thanks.

Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 23 December 2004 18:07 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Alex, to be fair to Neyer, he didn't bring Sutton and Ryan into the discussion. He was responding to the examples of Sutton and Ryan as mentioned in the reader's letter.

I think he's written a couple of other columns on Blyleven, maybe I can find them ...

MindInRewind (Barry Bruner), Thursday, 23 December 2004 18:13 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Thanks for the link.

Those are some mind-numbing stats!

Thermo Thinwall (Thermo Thinwall), Thursday, 23 December 2004 18:14 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Michael Wolverton makes the case for Blyleven:
http://espn.go.com/mlb/s/2002/0728/1411078.html

This, and many other articles stating his HoF case are collected -- where else? -- on Blyleven's web page:

http://www.bertblyleven.com/hall_of_fame.shtml

xpost -- yeah, the Morris article is a bit of a numbers slog, but it's well done.

MindInRewind (Barry Bruner), Thursday, 23 December 2004 18:21 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

"I'm not sure how many pitchers in history meet your def of "great," Alex"

Enough, believe me. And I saw him compare him to two HOF pitchers, one of whom is IMO a mistake and the other who is basically in the Hall because he had a zillion strikeouts and a slew of no hitters. Compare him to Carlton or Seaver or Hunter or any of the really great pitchers from his era, if you want to make your point (that this guy is getting job) don't just claim he was "better than Don Sutton" cuz my response to that is so the fuck what.

Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Thursday, 23 December 2004 18:38 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

getting jobbed, ahem.

That second ESPN article is much better btw and makes a pretty good case.

Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Thursday, 23 December 2004 18:40 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Catfish "really great"? Come now... talk about a guy who lucked out. Look at Hunter vs Blyleven (or Sutton, for that matter) and tell me how Hunter's better.

No, Bert is not Seaver or Carlton.

Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 23 December 2004 18:58 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Bert's website is great btw. He should get in just for having that.

Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Thursday, 23 December 2004 19:04 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Well I didn't see Hunter, but the perenial All Star games, the Cy Young, the top 4 in Cy Young voting four times, the fact that he supposedly one of the most respected pitchers of his era, the postseason accolades, the biggest free agent coup ever for his time and the very impressive statistics kinda indicated to me that he might have been good. Obv you know better though.

Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Thursday, 23 December 2004 19:48 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

All that stuff about Hunter is true, and of course that's why he got in. Looking deeper into the numbers though ... he pitched in extreme pitchers parks for his entire career, played for great teams, and generally didn't have great ERA's (he was in the top 3 three times, but never in the top 10 otherwise). He threw a lot of innings, but was overworked at a young age which is why he was washed up at 30, which is hella young for a HoF'er.

He played for fifteen years, and he had about four great years, four good years, and the rest were downright BAD. If he'd pitched for anyone other than the 70's A's and Yankees dynasties, there's no way he'd be anywhere near a serious HoF discussion.

MindInRewind (Barry Bruner), Thursday, 23 December 2004 20:51 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

"He threw a lot of innings, but was overworked at a young age which is why he was washed up at 30, which is hella young for a HoF'er."

See this is where I get the impression that cold-dispassionate analysis of the stats lies a little. For 5 years (71-75), Hunter was probably hands down the most feared pitcher in baseball. No he might not have been Koufax, but he was still by all accounts pretty amazing. Those five years count for more to me than 20 some odd years of just pretty good workmanlike pitching (I will admit that these breakdowns of Blyleven's stats are making a pretty case that he was better than that.) (I do have to wonder WHY if Bert was so great, he um didn't get snatched up by better teams? I mean that can't all be bad luck, right?)

Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Thursday, 23 December 2004 21:23 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Burt Blyleven:

Postseason Pitching


Year Round Tm Opp WLser G GS ERA W-L SV CG SHO IP H ER BB SO
+------------------+-----+--+--+------+-----+--+--+---+-----+---+---+---+---+
1970 ALCS MIN BAL L 1 0 0.00 0-0 0 0 0 2.0 2 0 0 2
1979 NLCS PIT CIN W 1 1 1.00 1-0 0 1 0 9.0 8 1 0 9
WS PIT BAL W 2 1 1.80 1-0 0 0 0 10.0 8 2 3 4
1987 ALCS MIN DET W 2 2 4.05 2-0 0 0 0 13.3 12 6 3 9
WS MIN STL W 2 2 2.77 1-1 0 0 0 13.0 13 4 2 12
+------------------+-----+--+--+------+-----+--+--+---+-----+---+---+---+---+
3 Lg Champ Series 2-1 4 3 2.59 3-0 0 1 0 24.3 22 7 3 20
2 World Series 2-0 4 3 2.35 2-1 0 0 0 23.0 21 6 5 16
5 Postseason Ser 4-1 8 6 2.47 5-1 0 1 0 47.3 43 13 8 36
+------------------+-----+--+--+------+-----+--+--+---+-----+---+---+---+---+

He didn't get many chances, but Blyleven pitched well in the playoffs and was a part of two World Series Champions.

Earl Nash (earlnash), Thursday, 23 December 2004 21:37 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

I seem to remember Bert looking pretty good in the series with the Cardinals (aka the original You Don't Win If You Don't Play At Home series.)

Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Thursday, 23 December 2004 21:48 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

I do have to wonder WHY if Bert was so great, he um didn't get snatched up by better teams?

Many of his best years came before free agency, so he didn't have much choice in the matter.

Even with free agency, it's only during the last ten years or so that all the best players end up on big-market winning teams at some point, since eventually those are the only teams that can afford them. If Jaret Wright can bounce around for a while, have one good season after a slew of crappy ones, and end up with a multi-year deal from a perennial contender, then Blyleven would have ended up playing for more winning teams too, if he was playing today.

Even so, every era has a few great players who toil away in relative obscurity. Look at Bobby Abreu, or even Carlos Delgado. If Delgado goes to the Mets, maybe in 20 years people will be saying "if he was so good, why did his teams always finish in third place?"

MindInRewind (Barry Bruner), Thursday, 23 December 2004 22:54 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Nobody says that about hitters (as their stats aren't at all dependent on their team being good.) They just look at the stats and marvel that nobody noticed at the time.

Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Thursday, 23 December 2004 23:22 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

I have no idea why previous subjective honors (Cy Youngs, All-Star selections) would be used as criteria for another subjective honor.

Alex, nobody's saying Hunter wasn't GOOD, just that Blyleven was better for MUCH longer, and that "good press" shouldn't be a measure of excellence. And I don't see Hunter '71-75 being "amazing" ... His most "impressive statistics" are wins (ie, having good teammates) and innings pitched (which blew out his arm, as MIR says). I think he got extra credit for the pennants and the sexy nicknames. And it's cute how you use high Cy Young finishes as relevant to Hunter, not relevant for Blyleven. (Also, I don't see Hunter's status as the first Big Splash free agent being relevant; see Marvin Miller's book for how clownishly Catfish handled that situation.)

The "cold-dispassionate analysis of the stats" is the most reliable evidence there is. Not "what you heard" (from Joe Morgan?). And it isn't so much that Blyleven toiled for bad teams (they were more often mediocre), but pitched in hitters' parks.

Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Sunday, 26 December 2004 03:58 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Speaking of Marvin Miller, what are the odds of him getting in this year (the nu-Vets Committee votes this year, right?).

I hope it happens soon so that he lives to attend his own induction.

MindInRewind (Barry Bruner), Sunday, 26 December 2004 08:04 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

blah blah blah. my opinon is better than your opinion and i have proof! blah blah blah.


otto midnight (otto midnight), Monday, 27 December 2004 07:32 (thirteen years ago) Permalink


I generally agree, OM. HOF debates generally bore me, especially when one side is "he was MONEY" or "folks sure wrote boilerplate hosannas about him in the '70s."

It's not lookin' good for Marv, MIR -- when the Vets voted last in '03, no one came close to getting 75% ... and of the 60 votes required for election, Miller got 35. He got three FEWER votes than Walter O'Malley -- or as we call him in Brooklyn, Satan.

Miller and other non-players are on the "composite" ballot. Here's this year's players' ballot:

http://www.baseballhalloffame.org/hofers_and_honorees/veterans/2005/2005_vc_candidates.htm


The only one I'm sold on is Santo, but Dick Allen and Tony Oliva have decent cases -- as does Curt Flood for courage and legal pioneering.

Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Monday, 27 December 2004 14:28 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Rocky Colavito was a bit like Jim Rice, he hit like he was going to the Hall until he hit his early 30s, then it was over. I have a dog eared card of his when he played in Cleveland.

Mickey Lolich won't get in the Hall, but his pitching in the 68 World Series may be the best performance ever in the fall classic by a starter. The guy out pitched Bob Gibson in Game Seven on TWO days rest. ESPN Classic was showed that game a few months back and it was great. Harry Caray was doing the play by play.

While I don't know if he is good enough player to make the hall, Al Oliver had a pretty good career and never gets put on these kind of lists.

Earl Nash (earlnash), Monday, 27 December 2004 16:38 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

I don't think it looks good for anybody to get voted in by the nu-Vets committee anytime soon ... as Morbs said, nobody came close to getting 75% last time. If they go through two or three voting years with nobody getting elected, they'll probably change the rules.

MindInRewind (Barry Bruner), Monday, 27 December 2004 17:12 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Al Oliver was just "pretty good," ie a hitter not any more suitable for enshrinement than Rusty Staub or Vada Pinson. (His top BaseballRef comparables are Steve Garvey and Bill Buckner -- same story.)

Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Monday, 27 December 2004 17:29 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Just out of curiousity how old are you Dr Morbius?

Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Monday, 27 December 2004 17:43 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Exactly 5 years younger than Jesse Orosco!

Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Monday, 27 December 2004 17:55 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

(I suspected as much.) Anyway, I was talking with my family about Blyleven this weekend and apparently he had a reputation of not being particularly well-liked and kind of an odd duck to boot (although I'm guessing that being Dutch was probably considered totally bizarre enough for a lot of people.)

Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Monday, 27 December 2004 18:05 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Al Oliver didn't walk much

Riot Gear! (Gear!), Monday, 27 December 2004 18:22 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

I hear that a few people didn't like Ty Cobb either.

MindInRewind (Barry Bruner), Monday, 27 December 2004 18:27 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Yes well luckily for Cobb he was a couple of generations removed from the people who were voting on his HOF induction so his jerkiness was more anecdotal than personal.

Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Monday, 27 December 2004 18:38 (thirteen years ago) Permalink


Cobb's last season: 1928
Inducted into HOF: 1936

Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Monday, 27 December 2004 19:15 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Cobb retired in 1928 and was elected in 1936. So many of the voters would have seen him play.

My general point is that "b...b...but he was a bit of an asshole" is a criticism that's used far too often despite being irrelevant most of the time. As long as the guy didn't compromise the game of baseball (Pete Rose being the most obvious example) then I couldn't care less if he was moody and didn't get along with everybody. If he could bring it on the field, then that's the most important thing.

(xpost)

MindInRewind (Barry Bruner), Monday, 27 December 2004 19:16 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

It wasn't a criticism. I was just pointing out that it might be a reason why he'd been snubbed (that and of course that people are overly fixated on 300 wins, which is also not a very fair reason.) Of course, people who can't read for shit might have trouble distinguishing the two.

Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Monday, 27 December 2004 19:21 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

"Cobb's last season: 1928
Inducted into HOF: 1936"

Haha I need to learn to check baseballreference.com before I say stuff sometimes.

Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Monday, 27 December 2004 19:23 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

And I didn't say that YOU specifically were the one doing the criticising. I was saying that anyone who would withhold a HoF vote in part because they felt that player needed an attitude adjustment are themselves in need of an attitude adjustment.

MindInRewind (Barry Bruner), Monday, 27 December 2004 19:33 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

There is a 5 year period between (2007-2011), that I would consider to be Sabathia's peak, in which he was second only to Halladay in fWAR. On top of that, he was arguably the best left-handed pitcher of that period.

Van Horn Street, Tuesday, 12 December 2017 00:27 (one month ago) Permalink

you are doing CC a disservice

mookieproof, Tuesday, 12 December 2017 00:27 (one month ago) Permalink

i know this isn't the best comparison to morris, but just for fun

bartolo colon

Karl Malone, Tuesday, 12 December 2017 00:31 (one month ago) Permalink

actually, maybe it's a decent comp?

https://i.imgur.com/aGxXEKh.png
https://i.imgur.com/0xnyo2d.png

Karl Malone, Tuesday, 12 December 2017 00:36 (one month ago) Permalink

and of course, the most important information of all:

https://i.imgur.com/I7pujkO.png

Karl Malone, Tuesday, 12 December 2017 00:38 (one month ago) Permalink

(xposts) Probably, yeah--in terms of peak, anyway. For their careers, their ERA+ is more comparable (117-105 for CC), but still a decent margin for CC.

I noticed Colon on Morris's Similarity Score list.

clemenza, Tuesday, 12 December 2017 00:41 (one month ago) Permalink

OK, Morris was the THIRD-losingest pitcher of the '80s. Clancy (126), Tanana (122), Morris (119).

Wins '77-'86: Guidry. '78-'87 through '83-'92: all Morris. '84-'93: Clemens/Viola

Morris never placed higher than fifth in AL ERA. Where he placed during qualifying seasons: 5th, 41st, 15th, 33rd, 10th, 20th, 9th, 6th, 5th, 26th, 37th, 34th, 16th, 27th. And of course his last two seasons, both non-qualifying, were flat-out terrible.

Morris never finished higher than third for the Cy Young.

Maybe if there had been something like a Hefty Cinch-Sak Durability Award during these years, Morris would've been considered recognized enough.

Andy K, Tuesday, 12 December 2017 00:41 (one month ago) Permalink

You never know with the Veteran's Committee, but I think he may be the last pitcher of his kind to go in. You'll need to have at least a reasonable sabermetric case from now on--"narrative" and all that will still factor in (Bumgarner), but you'll need both.

clemenza, Tuesday, 12 December 2017 00:53 (one month ago) Permalink

CC won a Cy Young and finished in the top five another four times. Outside of five (or maybe six) seasons, he wasn't a *great* pitcher and I could see that counting against his HOF candidacy. But he was/is a much better pitcher than Morris.

NoTimeBeforeTime, Tuesday, 12 December 2017 08:48 (one month ago) Permalink

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DQ2QHcOX0AAY0Ha.jpg

LOL

Andy K, Tuesday, 12 December 2017 12:59 (one month ago) Permalink

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DQ2QHcOX0AAY0Ha.jpg

Andy K, Tuesday, 12 December 2017 13:00 (one month ago) Permalink

I played in the Freehan and Kaline leagues when I was a teenager. The conference (or whatever) recently added Morris and Trammell leagues. I don’t know anything about baseball statistics but it makes sense from a little league perspective.

Allen (etaeoe), Tuesday, 12 December 2017 15:14 (one month ago) Permalink

I realize that’s likely only interesting to Andy K.

Allen (etaeoe), Tuesday, 12 December 2017 15:15 (one month ago) Permalink

Cliff Lee nearly equaled Morris' WAR in ~1700 fewer innings

ice cream social justice (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 12 December 2017 16:14 (one month ago) Permalink

do we have a roster of this year's Vets Committee?

ice cream social justice (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 12 December 2017 16:14 (one month ago) Permalink

Each year's Committee is different and is selected by the Hall Board of Directors. This year's panel includes six Hall of Fame players: George Brett, Rod Carew, Dennis Eckersley, Don Sutton, Dave Winfield and Robin Yount in addition to Hall of Fame manager Bobby Cox and Hall of Fame executive John Schuerholz, both of the Braves.

Mets general manager Sandy Alderson, former Blue Jays president Paul Beeston, Reds president Bob Castellini, Cardinals chairman Bill DeWitt, Royals chairman David Glass, veteran BBWAA members Bob Elliott and Jayson Stark and historian Steve Hirdt of the Elias Sport Bureau make up the remainder of the group.

https://www.mlb.com/news/modern-era-committee-prepares-for-hall-vote/c-263109628

Karl Malone, Tuesday, 12 December 2017 16:22 (one month ago) Permalink

I played in the Freehan and Kaline leagues when I was a teenager. The conference (or whatever) recently added Morris and Trammell leagues. I don’t know anything about baseball statistics but it makes sense from a little league perspective.

Kids born around 2025 will play in the Inge league.

Andy K, Tuesday, 12 December 2017 17:00 (one month ago) Permalink

Frick award to Costas

ice cream social justice (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 14 December 2017 16:36 (one month ago) Permalink

His stirring speech in that Space Ghost episode cemented it.

WilliamC, Thursday, 14 December 2017 16:40 (one month ago) Permalink

If you're appalled by Jack Morris, be happy they're not inducting the baseball equivalent of Bon Jovi, Dire Straits, or the Moody Blues. (If you count Morris as worse than any of those three, we either hear music or evaluate baseball players very differently.)

clemenza, Thursday, 14 December 2017 17:41 (one month ago) Permalink

y'know, jack morris and dire straits isn't the woooorst baseball to music comp...

Karl Malone, Thursday, 14 December 2017 17:46 (one month ago) Permalink

Bon Jovi is Trevor Hoffman, he comes into the game when the team is halfway there to a victory.

omar little, Thursday, 14 December 2017 18:20 (one month ago) Permalink

yeah sort of feel like those are pretty good morris/garvey analogs....

k3vin k., Thursday, 14 December 2017 20:55 (one month ago) Permalink

And you can throw the Cars in there too--didn't realize they were in.

clemenza, Thursday, 14 December 2017 22:36 (one month ago) Permalink

On the HOF tracker it's interesting to see the net gain votes. Edgar and vlad are doing well enough that induction seems solid for both of them, but Walker has picked up 18 votes already from only small portion of ballots. Still only around 42% but that's huge.

omar little, Thursday, 21 December 2017 22:45 (three weeks ago) Permalink

Very surprised that Thome's holding at 97%. That's great, I'm all for it. I assumed he was going to be this year's Bagwell/Piazza, made to wait a couple of extra years because of suspicion. That gray area may have vanished permanently.

clemenza, Friday, 22 December 2017 01:27 (three weeks ago) Permalink

as Morbs said, no smoking needle (also no actual suspicion cast his way, iirc.)

omar little, Friday, 22 December 2017 02:02 (three weeks ago) Permalink

My own recollection is that he was always mentioned on the list of suspected users, but when I do a search of "Jim Thome steroids," the first page of results are all about how he was clean. So I guess I'm misremembering.

clemenza, Friday, 22 December 2017 02:46 (three weeks ago) Permalink

Not helpful if you're of the belief he should be in:

http://www.12up.com/posts/5932863-curt-schilling-caught-praising-white-supremacist-during-radio-show?a_aid=36534

clemenza, Saturday, 30 December 2017 19:10 (two weeks ago) Permalink

curt schilling should be elected into the hall of fame and then thrown into the bottom of the ocean

Karl Malone, Saturday, 30 December 2017 19:17 (two weeks ago) Permalink

good plan imho

ice cream social justice (Dr Morbius), Saturday, 30 December 2017 19:18 (two weeks ago) Permalink

Edgar is currently at 80% on the HOF tracker. not sure how it'll play out the rest of the way but he seems like a safe bet for induction next year at least.

Larry Walker is at 40%, he's got two more years on the ballot, I could see a major push the next couple years. people seem to be coming around on him.

omar little, Saturday, 30 December 2017 19:19 (two weeks ago) Permalink

Emphatic Yes for both of them.

clemenza, Saturday, 30 December 2017 19:25 (two weeks ago) Permalink

andruw jones is at 5.7%. hope he doesn't get jim edmonds'd

Karl Malone, Saturday, 30 December 2017 19:28 (two weeks ago) Permalink

I'm laughing at that URL: "caught praising white supremacist during radio show." I picture Schilling furtively looking around to see if anyone's watching. It's a radio show--chances are, this won't remain a secret.

clemenza, Saturday, 30 December 2017 19:31 (two weeks ago) Permalink

meanwhile chipper jones is at 98.6%

just checked to see which jones put up higher fWARs during their years together:

1997: tie (3.7 to 3.7)
1998: chipper (7.1 to 7.0)
1999: chipper (7.3 to 6.9)
2000: andruw (7.7 to 6.0)
2001:chipper (6.1 to 4.9)
2002: andruw (6.3 to 5.9)
2003: andruw (5.2 to 3.9)
2004: andruw (5.3 to 3.3)
2005: andruw (7.9 to 4.9) *chipper injured
2006: andruw (6.0 to 3.9) *chipper injured
2007: chipper (3.3 to 6.9)

Karl Malone, Saturday, 30 December 2017 19:40 (two weeks ago) Permalink

There's a decent chance we'll get five inductees from this batch which would be a good deck-clearing.

omar little, Saturday, 30 December 2017 22:22 (two weeks ago) Permalink

def

k3vin k., Sunday, 31 December 2017 01:34 (two weeks ago) Permalink

Neat comparison unearthed by Posnanski in an SI column:

Player 1: 254-186, 105 ERA+, 3,824 innings, 2,478 Ks, 1,390 Walks, 1.296 WHIP, 49.8 combo WAR

Player 2: 258-195, 105 ERA+, 3,908 innings, 2,342 Ks, 1,117 Walks, 1.323 WHIP, 49.0 combo WAR

Pretty darned similar, yes? Player 1 is newest Hall of Famer Jack Morris. Player 2 is Jamie Moyer, obviously, but discounting his final two seasons so we could get the innings to roughly match up. Moyer added 11 more wins, 14 more losses and various other things to his totals in those two seasons, when he was 47 and 49.

http://www.mlb.com/news/jamie-moyer-was-a-talented-underrated-pitcher/c-264135260

clemenza, Wednesday, 3 January 2018 17:18 (one week ago) Permalink

Jamie Moyer also got lost in Chicago and really did not get it together as a starter until he was about 30. Dave Stewart had a similar career arc, though he was a good reliever when he first came up with the Dodgers then lost it and came kinda out of nowhere to have good decade as a starter.

earlnash, Thursday, 4 January 2018 01:16 (one week ago) Permalink

this seems more like an argument that jack morris shouldn't be in the hall of fame

mookieproof, Thursday, 4 January 2018 01:18 (one week ago) Permalink

makes sense to me

Karl Malone, Thursday, 4 January 2018 01:20 (one week ago) Permalink

i still maintain that Jack Morris' best career move w/r/t getting into the HOF was choosing to grow a bushy mustache.

omar little, Thursday, 4 January 2018 01:28 (one week ago) Permalink

tbf i kinda like him as a broadcaster -- he's just as full of shit as the rest of them, but he's very quiet about it

mookieproof, Thursday, 4 January 2018 01:46 (one week ago) Permalink

the 50 best players left off of the HOF ballot entirely:

http://www.hallofstats.com/articles/willie-davis-left-off-bbwaa-ballot

Karl Malone, Sunday, 7 January 2018 18:08 (one week ago) Permalink

Great list. I wonder if a) you could fill out a lineup card, filling every position, and b) with an average pitching staff, could that lineup win a divisional title?

clemenza, Sunday, 7 January 2018 21:43 (one week ago) Permalink

1b Bob Allison
2b Bill Doran
SS Scott Fletcher
3b Jim Gilliam
LF Von Hayes
CF Willie Davis
RF Jesse Barfield
C Mike Scoscia

Rotation
Brandon Webb
Mark Gubicza
Teddy Higuera
Javier Vazquez

bullpen
Keith Foulke
Joe Nuxhall
Mike Morgan

Pretty good team.

earlnash, Monday, 8 January 2018 00:37 (one week ago) Permalink

If the stars were aligned right, definitely--looks like all the position players and starters had, at a minimum, career years of ~5.0 WAR, sometimes much higher (Higuera was over 9.0 one year).

clemenza, Tuesday, 9 January 2018 04:18 (one week ago) Permalink

vlad was one of my favorite players as a kid, so I'm glad he's going in, but the strength of his support is strange to me: he doesn't really have any of the usual counting stats, no real postseason success... does have that MVP tho, and being cool as hell to watch

k3vin k., Tuesday, 9 January 2018 06:29 (one week ago) Permalink

Guerrero was better, but his candidacy looks very much like Puckett's to me. They're almost identical in WAR/650 PA--4.8 Vlad, 4.7 Kirby--and, 1) short careers, 2) retired when they were still playing well, 3) high average, low walks, 4) (most important) colourful players most fans loved (before we knew the whole story about about Puckett). This is where I'm okay with not treating the HOF as just your career box--I'm okay with letting narrative or whatever you want to call it creep in. In the Keith Law book, he identifies Puckett as a bad HOF choice. (Don't have the book on hand--I think he was more negative than that.) Putting the post-career revelations aside, I'm glad Puckett's in the HOF--I want him in there.

clemenza, Tuesday, 9 January 2018 12:38 (one week ago) Permalink


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.