2007 Baseball HOF Ballot... (1 Viewer)

[RonMexico]

Results of a survey conducted by The Associated Press among

eligible baseball Hall of Fame voters on whether they plan to vote

for Mark McGwire on the upcoming ballot. Of the 125 voters

contacted, 97 gave an opinion:

Yes - 23 (24 percent of those expressing an opinion)

No - 74 (76 percent of those expressing an opinion)

Undecided - 16

Not allowed to vote by their employers - 5

Won't say - 5

Won't vote - 2

Results of a survey conducted by the AP among eligible Hall

voters last year on whether they planned to vote for McGwire.

March 2005 AP Survey

Yes - 65 (56 percent of those expressing an opinion)

No - 52 (44 percent of those expressing an opinion)

Undecided - 38

 

[Eephus]

Gossage

Gwynn

Morris

Ripken

Sorry Doc, but I just don't think Morris makes the cut...254 wins is solid, but a 3.90 ERA is just not HOF worthy, IMO, especially since it was pre-offensive explosion era baseball...

In fact, in the 11 seasons between his 25 year old seasonand his 35 year old season, he had a worse than league average ERA 4 times...

Gets points for his 91 series performance, but overall postseason #s are a solid but unspectacular 7-4, 3.80 ERA...

I'd put Blyleven in the Hall over Morris...

Alright I'm ready. Jack Morris should be in the Hall of fame for the following reasons:

He won 254 games more than Gibson, Ford, Hubbell, and Marichal . You can compare him to Blyleven but Blyleven pitched 22 years won 20 only once (that year he lost 17) and Bert had a bunch of middling seasons for 22 years. Morris threw 175 complete games and had 28 shutouts in five less years wining just 35 less games, and making the all star game five times

Morris finished in the top five in the Cy Young in 1981, 1983, 1991, and 1992.

2500 Ks (more than HOF Jim Palmer, Marichal, Grove and Catfish Hunter among others)

Lead the league in wins in 1981 and 1992

He won 15 games 12 times. He won 20 twice and never finished higher than 3rd in the Cy Young because of his ERA. Again you take the league av ERA and although Morris was only at +100 to +126 you have to consider the ballpark he played in and his road vs home ERA. Blyleven I believe suffers from his career ERA as well because he has similar ERA numbers.

But most importantly Jack Morris had his biggest games on baseball's biggest stage:

Take away the three losses in his final year with Toronto and he was 7-1 with dominate performances in two different World Series in 1984 and in 1991. In those two series' he had four wins, no losses, three complete games, and one of the three most memorable games in World Series history in game seven of the 1991 World Series throwing a CG shutout over ten freakin innings. It is the greatest pitching performance in World Series history because of that one extra inning and it was a game seven. Morris>Larson

Was he the best pitcher in the regular season? No. He played in two small ballparks for most of his career in Detroit and Minnesota and was expected to pitch deep into games. He had 15, 17, 9, 20,13, 15, 13 complete games in the prime of his career.

Also factor in things like how many innings he was having to pitch. IN 1986 he threw six CG shutouts and completed seven of his eight final games in a pennant race winning all but one of them of them. The only game he didn't complete he went 8.67 allowing six runs and eight hits. He got pulled because he got in trouble and for Jack Morris getting in trouble was six runs in the 9th. :X

In 1984 he threw a no hitter on three days rest against the White Sox in the first week of the season. He started that season 10-1 with 8 complete games! Tigers started 35-5 and he was a huge reason. He was 3-0 in the playoffs giving up five earned runs in 25 innings and the Tigers won all three games.

In 1991 he was 4-0 giving up nine runs in 36 innings including a 10 inning shutout in game seven of the World Series.

In 1992 a older Jack Morris was 10-2 from August 1st on helping the Blue Jays win their division.

His overall numbers are of the Palmer, Hunter, and Phil Niekro variety. Niekro won 318 and was an automatic selection just because he pitched so damn long. Morris dominated hitters and was one of the best pitchers in the game from 1982 to 1992 if not the best during those years. Moreover Blyleven and Niekro who has similar numbers pitched longer and never lead a decade of consistent and very above average pitching. You can name better pitchers from one or two years in this period but not better pitchers over that many years. Morris was never the best pitcher in any one season but he was the best over a decade.

He also perfected the split fingered fastball making him a modern day trailblazer and a clutch performer on baseball's biggest stage. He's no Carlton, Maddux, or Cy Young but what he was is one of the best pitchers of his generation if not the best over an entire decade. This was playing in a very hitter friendly parks in Detroit and Minnesota. Unlike Rice, Trammell, or any of the other candidates to include even Gossage who I love, Jack Morris was better than almost all of his peers during a ten to twelve year stretch and his career numbers although not eye popping, are good enough under the circumstances to get a bust in Cooperstown.

JACK F'N MORRIS TO THE HALL OF FAME BABY!

edited for effect

Since Dr. Detroit went through all the effort to document his homer case, I'll agree on purely an emotional level. Morris seemed like a hall of famer while he was active, although his peak and career numbers don't work on a purely quantitative basis.The Cat probably has a better chance of dropping off the ballot than getting in the Hall any time soon. His best hope is that his numbers pair up better in the future vs. pitchers of the steroid era, and that the writers get tired of voting in hitters year after year.

If you look at active pitchers, there aren't many with HoF credentials better than Morris. Clemens and Maddux certainly; Pedro, Johnson and Glavine probably; and maybe Smoltz for his versatility. But I'd match Jack's post season heroics against Schilling's bloody sock, and Morris arguably has better credentials than any other active pitcher.

 

[the moops]

Gossage

Gwynn

Morris

Ripken

Sorry Doc, but I just don't think Morris makes the cut...254 wins is solid, but a 3.90 ERA is just not HOF worthy, IMO, especially since it was pre-offensive explosion era baseball...

In fact, in the 11 seasons between his 25 year old seasonand his 35 year old season, he had a worse than league average ERA 4 times...

Gets points for his 91 series performance, but overall postseason #s are a solid but unspectacular 7-4, 3.80 ERA...

I'd put Blyleven in the Hall over Morris...

Alright I'm ready. Jack Morris should be in the Hall of fame for the following reasons:

He won 254 games more than Gibson, Ford, Hubbell, and Marichal . You can compare him to Blyleven but Blyleven pitched 22 years won 20 only once (that year he lost 17) and Bert had a bunch of middling seasons for 22 years. Morris threw 175 complete games and had 28 shutouts in five less years wining just 35 less games, and making the all star game five times

Morris finished in the top five in the Cy Young in 1981, 1983, 1991, and 1992.

2500 Ks (more than HOF Jim Palmer, Marichal, Grove and Catfish Hunter among others)

Lead the league in wins in 1981 and 1992

He won 15 games 12 times. He won 20 twice and never finished higher than 3rd in the Cy Young because of his ERA. Again you take the league av ERA and although Morris was only at +100 to +126 you have to consider the ballpark he played in and his road vs home ERA. Blyleven I believe suffers from his career ERA as well because he has similar ERA numbers.

But most importantly Jack Morris had his biggest games on baseball's biggest stage:

Take away the three losses in his final year with Toronto and he was 7-1 with dominate performances in two different World Series in 1984 and in 1991. In those two series' he had four wins, no losses, three complete games, and one of the three most memorable games in World Series history in game seven of the 1991 World Series throwing a CG shutout over ten freakin innings. It is the greatest pitching performance in World Series history because of that one extra inning and it was a game seven. Morris>Larson

Was he the best pitcher in the regular season? No. He played in two small ballparks for most of his career in Detroit and Minnesota and was expected to pitch deep into games. He had 15, 17, 9, 20,13, 15, 13 complete games in the prime of his career.

Also factor in things like how many innings he was having to pitch. IN 1986 he threw six CG shutouts and completed seven of his eight final games in a pennant race winning all but one of them of them. The only game he didn't complete he went 8.67 allowing six runs and eight hits. He got pulled because he got in trouble and for Jack Morris getting in trouble was six runs in the 9th. :X

In 1984 he threw a no hitter on three days rest against the White Sox in the first week of the season. He started that season 10-1 with 8 complete games! Tigers started 35-5 and he was a huge reason. He was 3-0 in the playoffs giving up five earned runs in 25 innings and the Tigers won all three games.

In 1991 he was 4-0 giving up nine runs in 36 innings including a 10 inning shutout in game seven of the World Series.

In 1992 a older Jack Morris was 10-2 from August 1st on helping the Blue Jays win their division.

His overall numbers are of the Palmer, Hunter, and Phil Niekro variety. Niekro won 318 and was an automatic selection just because he pitched so damn long. Morris dominated hitters and was one of the best pitchers in the game from 1982 to 1992 if not the best during those years. Moreover Blyleven and Niekro who has similar numbers pitched longer and never lead a decade of consistent and very above average pitching. You can name better pitchers from one or two years in this period but not better pitchers over that many years. Morris was never the best pitcher in any one season but he was the best over a decade.

He also perfected the split fingered fastball making him a modern day trailblazer and a clutch performer on baseball's biggest stage. He's no Carlton, Maddux, or Cy Young but what he was is one of the best pitchers of his generation if not the best over an entire decade. This was playing in a very hitter friendly parks in Detroit and Minnesota. Unlike Rice, Trammell, or any of the other candidates to include even Gossage who I love, Jack Morris was better than almost all of his peers during a ten to twelve year stretch and his career numbers although not eye popping, are good enough under the circumstances to get a bust in Cooperstown.

JACK F'N MORRIS TO THE HALL OF FAME BABY!

edited for effect

Since Dr. Detroit went through all the effort to document his homer case, I'll agree on purely an emotional level. Morris seemed like a hall of famer while he was active, although his peak and career numbers don't work on a purely quantitative basis.The Cat probably has a better chance of dropping off the ballot than getting in the Hall any time soon. His best hope is that his numbers pair up better in the future vs. pitchers of the steroid era, and that the writers get tired of voting in hitters year after year.

If you look at active pitchers, there aren't many with HoF credentials better than Morris. Clemens and Maddux certainly; Pedro, Johnson and Glavine probably; and maybe Smoltz for his versatility. But I'd match Jack's post season heroics against Schilling's bloody sock, and Morris arguably has better credentials than any other active pitcher.

All those guys you listed have better postseason numbers than Morris. All of them. Including Smoltz, Johnson, Pedro, Schilling, and Glavine.Post season ERA

Schilling-2.06

Smoltz-2.65

Maddux-3.34

Pedro-3.40

Glavine-3.42

Johnson-3.50

Clemens-3.71

Morris-3.80

World Series ERA, Morris comes in last amongst those fellas also.

 

[Pat Patriot]

' date='Nov 27 2006, 11:42 AM' post='5967796']JIM RICE

Guy has 6 top 5 MVP seasons. He deserves to be in. The most feared hitter of his era. The guy had average speed at best and had back to back seasons of 15 triples. That tells you something.

 

[Thorn]

Only person to have 200 hits and 30 home runs in three straight seasons, ever: Jim Rice.

And almost 200/40 (39, 46, 39).

 

[opticution]

I've come around on Rice. I think he should be in. It's not like he's Steve Garvey.

Morris is out. I just can't justify his career numbers. Wins often have little to do with the pitching performance. I think the notion of "clutch" has been definitively dismissed as well. That '91 10 inning shutout was a magical moment, but it's one game.

 

[BoulderBob]

Hopefully McGwire won't get in on the first ballot.

"FIRST BALLOT HOF" is the stupidest thing the blowhards on sports talk TV and Radio ever came up with. You're just a Hall of Famer. There's no distinction. "First Ballot" doesn't mean anything. There's no sense behind "Mr. X deserves to be in the HOF, just not on the first ballot." If he deserves it, he deserves it. I've been to the Hall in Cooperstown. There's no levels. There's no tiers. Babe Ruth's plaque isn't in the penthouse while Phil Rizzuto's out by the dumpsters. Babe Ruth is with his year of guys, Rizzuto's with his, and if McGwire goes he's in with his class and that's the end of it. Everyone's equal in the Hall because that's the way it is. Once you're in, you're in.In 10 years, the fans that the HOF is built for won't remember, nor care, how long it took someone to get in. It'll just be a dad walking his kid past a plaque and saying, "Daddy saw him play, and he was amazing."

Well, umm, there should be a special wing for the guys that get in on the first ballot. Call it the no-brainer wing...

 

[Hov34]

Only person to have 200 hits and 30 home runs in three straight seasons, ever: Jim Rice.And almost 200/40 (39, 46, 39).

Except for Chuck Klein (4 straight seasons) and some guy named Gehrig. (and Lou still drew 100+ walks a in each of those years - something Rice never did)Hell, even Cecil Cooper came close if it wern't for the '81 strike.

 

[PizzaDeliveryGuy]

Gossage

Gwynn

Morris

Ripken

Sorry Doc, but I just don't think Morris makes the cut...254 wins is solid, but a 3.90 ERA is just not HOF worthy, IMO, especially since it was pre-offensive explosion era baseball...

In fact, in the 11 seasons between his 25 year old seasonand his 35 year old season, he had a worse than league average ERA 4 times...

Gets points for his 91 series performance, but overall postseason #s are a solid but unspectacular 7-4, 3.80 ERA...

I'd put Blyleven in the Hall over Morris...

Alright I'm ready. Jack Morris should be in the Hall of fame for the following reasons:

He won 254 games more than Gibson, Ford, Hubbell, and Marichal . You can compare him to Blyleven but Blyleven pitched 22 years won 20 only once (that year he lost 17) and Bert had a bunch of middling seasons for 22 years. Morris threw 175 complete games and had 28 shutouts in five less years wining just 35 less games, and making the all star game five times

Morris finished in the top five in the Cy Young in 1981, 1983, 1991, and 1992.

2500 Ks (more than HOF Jim Palmer, Marichal, Grove and Catfish Hunter among others)

Lead the league in wins in 1981 and 1992

He won 15 games 12 times. He won 20 twice and never finished higher than 3rd in the Cy Young because of his ERA. Again you take the league av ERA and although Morris was only at +100 to +126 you have to consider the ballpark he played in and his road vs home ERA. Blyleven I believe suffers from his career ERA as well because he has similar ERA numbers.

But most importantly Jack Morris had his biggest games on baseball's biggest stage:

Take away the three losses in his final year with Toronto and he was 7-1 with dominate performances in two different World Series in 1984 and in 1991. In those two series' he had four wins, no losses, three complete games, and one of the three most memorable games in World Series history in game seven of the 1991 World Series throwing a CG shutout over ten freakin innings. It is the greatest pitching performance in World Series history because of that one extra inning and it was a game seven. Morris>Larson

Was he the best pitcher in the regular season? No. He played in two small ballparks for most of his career in Detroit and Minnesota and was expected to pitch deep into games. He had 15, 17, 9, 20,13, 15, 13 complete games in the prime of his career.

Also factor in things like how many innings he was having to pitch. IN 1986 he threw six CG shutouts and completed seven of his eight final games in a pennant race winning all but one of them of them. The only game he didn't complete he went 8.67 allowing six runs and eight hits. He got pulled because he got in trouble and for Jack Morris getting in trouble was six runs in the 9th. :X

In 1984 he threw a no hitter on three days rest against the White Sox in the first week of the season. He started that season 10-1 with 8 complete games! Tigers started 35-5 and he was a huge reason. He was 3-0 in the playoffs giving up five earned runs in 25 innings and the Tigers won all three games.

In 1991 he was 4-0 giving up nine runs in 36 innings including a 10 inning shutout in game seven of the World Series.

In 1992 a older Jack Morris was 10-2 from August 1st on helping the Blue Jays win their division.

His overall numbers are of the Palmer, Hunter, and Phil Niekro variety. Niekro won 318 and was an automatic selection just because he pitched so damn long. Morris dominated hitters and was one of the best pitchers in the game from 1982 to 1992 if not the best during those years. Moreover Blyleven and Niekro who has similar numbers pitched longer and never lead a decade of consistent and very above average pitching. You can name better pitchers from one or two years in this period but not better pitchers over that many years. Morris was never the best pitcher in any one season but he was the best over a decade.

He also perfected the split fingered fastball making him a modern day trailblazer and a clutch performer on baseball's biggest stage. He's no Carlton, Maddux, or Cy Young but what he was is one of the best pitchers of his generation if not the best over an entire decade. This was playing in a very hitter friendly parks in Detroit and Minnesota. Unlike Rice, Trammell, or any of the other candidates to include even Gossage who I love, Jack Morris was better than almost all of his peers during a ten to twelve year stretch and his career numbers although not eye popping, are good enough under the circumstances to get a bust in Cooperstown.

JACK F'N MORRIS TO THE HALL OF FAME BABY!

edited for effect

Since Dr. Detroit went through all the effort to document his homer case, I'll agree on purely an emotional level. Morris seemed like a hall of famer while he was active, although his peak and career numbers don't work on a purely quantitative basis.The Cat probably has a better chance of dropping off the ballot than getting in the Hall any time soon. His best hope is that his numbers pair up better in the future vs. pitchers of the steroid era, and that the writers get tired of voting in hitters year after year.

If you look at active pitchers, there aren't many with HoF credentials better than Morris. Clemens and Maddux certainly; Pedro, Johnson and Glavine probably; and maybe Smoltz for his versatility. But I'd match Jack's post season heroics against Schilling's bloody sock, and Morris arguably has better credentials than any other active pitcher.

All those guys you listed have better postseason numbers than Morris. All of them. Including Smoltz, Johnson, Pedro, Schilling, and Glavine.Post season ERA

Schilling-2.06

Smoltz-2.65

Maddux-3.34

Pedro-3.40

Glavine-3.42

Johnson-3.50

Clemens-3.71

Morris-3.80

World Series ERA, Morris comes in last amongst those fellas also.

Would you quit killing DD's arguement please.

 

[PizzaDeliveryGuy]

Baines

Bichette

Brosius

White

 

[oso diablo]

i'll post some Win Share numbers without revealing which player they belong to. Will show career total, plus their 3rd best season (as a very lazy measure of peak). 30+ in a season is an MVP candidate level. Listed in order of career WS, for all players on the ballot with at least 275 career WS.

OK, decided to add the player's position, which will make some of them obvious, but see if you can guess the OFs.

Player / Career WS / 3rd best

SS / 427 / 34

OF / 399 / 30

1B / 343 / 30

OF / 341 / 26

SP / 339 / 23

OF / 325 / 31

SS / 318 / 29

DH / 307 / 22

OF / 292 / 32

SP / 289 / 19

1B / 280 / 25

OF / 280 / 28

SS / 278 / 24

 

[Frostillicus]

HAROLD BAINES

 

[the moops]

i'll post some Win Share numbers without revealing which player they belong to. Will show career total, plus their 3rd best season (as a very lazy measure of peak). 30+ in a season is an MVP candidate level. Listed in order of career WS, for all players on the ballot with at least 275 career WS.

OK, decided to add the player's position, which will make some of them obvious, but see if you can guess the OFs.

Player / Career WS / 3rd best

SS / 427 / 34

OF / 399 / 30

1B / 343 / 30

OF / 341 / 26

SP / 339 / 23

OF / 325 / 31

SS / 318 / 29

DH / 307 / 22

OF / 292 / 32

SP / 289 / 19

1B / 280 / 25

OF / 280 / 28

SS / 278 / 24

Considering Bill James doesnt think Jim Rice belongs in the HOF, I'm gonna guess that none of those belong to Jim Ed.

 

[the moops]

I'll give it a try.

SS / 427 / 34 - Ripken

OF / 399 / 30 - Gwynn

1B / 343 / 30 - Mcgwire

OF / 341 / 26 - Dawson

SP / 339 / 23 - Tommy John?

OF / 325 / 31 - Parker?

SS / 318 / 29 - Trammell

DH / 307 / 22 - Baines?

OF / 292 / 32 - Belle?

SP / 289 / 19 - Blyleven?

1B / 280 / 25 - Mattingly?

OF / 280 / 28 - Rice?

SS / 278 / 24 - who's the other SS on the ballot?

Man, that was harder than I thought. Pretty sure I got the first 4. Rice may be higher on the list, or not at all on the list. Trammell seems right too.

How did I do?

 

[J R]

for the Trammell voters. How the hell did he lose the MVP in 1987 to George Bell?

 

[the moops]

for the Trammell voters. How the hell did he lose the MVP in 1987 to George Bell?

Because baseball writers love RBI.See year 2006. Ryan Howard and Justin Morneau.

 

[Koya]

Ripken was both Dominant and had longevity.

Not only that, but he helped redefine a position. Before Ripken, you had two elite hitters at that position that I can think of. Eernie Banks and Arky Vaughan.

Ripken brought power as well as all of the fielding and fundamentals to a position which had never been known for much more than a good glove. That shouldn't go unnoticed.

Honus Wagner down?But I agree with your sentiments on Ripken. I sort of wish the whole "Iron Man" thing never happened, because in some people's eyes that is what they remember and not the fact that he was a dominate hitter while playing gold glove Shortstop.

I once had an argument on the radio with a local buffoon that was trying to say that Tino Martinez was a better player than Cal Ripken Jr. because Tino's career numbers were better and all Ripken had was the "Streak".

D'oh. I stand corrected. Wagner is, imo, by FAR, the best SS ever, especially from an offensive point of view. But you get my point.

 

[Thorn]

Only person to have 200 hits and 30 home runs in three straight seasons, ever: Jim Rice.And almost 200/40 (39, 46, 39).

Except for Chuck Klein (4 straight seasons) and some guy named Gehrig. (and Lou still drew 100+ walks a in each of those years - something Rice never did)Hell, even Cecil Cooper came close if it wern't for the '81 strike.

Whoops sorry. Only one to do 200/35 (no not even Gehrig). And if that makes it Gehrig>Klien>Rice>Cooper, I'm ok with that. Still think he belongs in.

 

[thecatch]

I don't know if this has already been discussed elsewhere, but Albert Belle makes an interesting case as a borderline HOFer. Not saying he'll get in or even should get in, but he's more qualified than most people will admit.

Baseballreference:

Black Ink: Batting - 28 (62) (Average HOFer ≈ 27)

Gray Ink: Batting - 137 (117) (Average HOFer ≈ 144)

HOF Standards: Batting - 36.1 (187) (Average HOFer ≈ 50)

HOF Monitor: Batting - 134.5 (94) (Likely HOFer > 100)

Overall Rank in parentheses.

 

[Michael Brown]

Albert Belle - Steroid era or not, his numbers blow away the field during the same time period. Ralph Kiner-esque career.

Andre Dawson - 400/400, playing all those games in Canada hurt the perception of how good he is

Rich "Goose" Gossage - If Fingers is in...

Tony Gwynn - Duh

Don Mattingly - If Puckett is in...

Jack Morris - Agree with just about everything DD said.

Jim Rice - Ludicrous that he's not in

Cal Ripken Jr. - Duh

Now Mattingly is my favorite player ever, so I know I may be blinded by that. And I probably wouldn't have put him in ordinarily. But Kirby Puckett is a first ballot HOFer and Mattingly doesn't get ANY credit? I know I make this same argument every year, but their career stats are almost identical. And considering how much Mattingly tailed off at the end, to have the same stats over the same number of games that actually means his period of dominance was BETTER than Kirby's. Puckett was always considered a great player. But for five years, Mattingly was the best player. I know Kirby has the rings, but it's not Mattingly's fault George didn't know how to sign pitching in the 80's (or now).

 

[MrPhoenix]

Rich "Goose" Gossage- Rollie Fingers and Bruce Sutter are in, and Goose is just as good as them, if not better.

Tony Gwynn- Guy could just flat-out hit.

Mark McGwire- Even with the Steroid cloud hanging over him (never proven he took them), he did have a magical season in 1998 and all in all, a solid career. If I can only vote for 4, I'd remove McGwire, though for the suspicions.

Jim Rice- One of the most feared hitters in his time. Has the numbers that statnicks approve of.

Cal Ripken Jr.- Like Gwynn, a shoo-in for the hall on the first ballot.

 

[Doctor Detroit]

Gossage

Gwynn

Morris

Ripken

Sorry Doc, but I just don't think Morris makes the cut...254 wins is solid, but a 3.90 ERA is just not HOF worthy, IMO, especially since it was pre-offensive explosion era baseball...

In fact, in the 11 seasons between his 25 year old seasonand his 35 year old season, he had a worse than league average ERA 4 times...

Gets points for his 91 series performance, but overall postseason #s are a solid but unspectacular 7-4, 3.80 ERA...

I'd put Blyleven in the Hall over Morris...

Alright I'm ready. Jack Morris should be in the Hall of fame for the following reasons:

He won 254 games more than Gibson, Ford, Hubbell, and Marichal . You can compare him to Blyleven but Blyleven pitched 22 years won 20 only once (that year he lost 17) and Bert had a bunch of middling seasons for 22 years. Morris threw 175 complete games and had 28 shutouts in five less years wining just 35 less games, and making the all star game five times

Morris finished in the top five in the Cy Young in 1981, 1983, 1991, and 1992.

2500 Ks (more than HOF Jim Palmer, Marichal, Grove and Catfish Hunter among others)

Lead the league in wins in 1981 and 1992

He won 15 games 12 times. He won 20 twice and never finished higher than 3rd in the Cy Young because of his ERA. Again you take the league av ERA and although Morris was only at +100 to +126 you have to consider the ballpark he played in and his road vs home ERA. Blyleven I believe suffers from his career ERA as well because he has similar ERA numbers.

But most importantly Jack Morris had his biggest games on baseball's biggest stage:

Take away the three losses in his final year with Toronto and he was 7-1 with dominate performances in two different World Series in 1984 and in 1991. In those two series' he had four wins, no losses, three complete games, and one of the three most memorable games in World Series history in game seven of the 1991 World Series throwing a CG shutout over ten freakin innings. It is the greatest pitching performance in World Series history because of that one extra inning and it was a game seven. Morris>Larson

Was he the best pitcher in the regular season? No. He played in two small ballparks for most of his career in Detroit and Minnesota and was expected to pitch deep into games. He had 15, 17, 9, 20,13, 15, 13 complete games in the prime of his career.

Also factor in things like how many innings he was having to pitch. IN 1986 he threw six CG shutouts and completed seven of his eight final games in a pennant race winning all but one of them of them. The only game he didn't complete he went 8.67 allowing six runs and eight hits. He got pulled because he got in trouble and for Jack Morris getting in trouble was six runs in the 9th. :X

In 1984 he threw a no hitter on three days rest against the White Sox in the first week of the season. He started that season 10-1 with 8 complete games! Tigers started 35-5 and he was a huge reason. He was 3-0 in the playoffs giving up five earned runs in 25 innings and the Tigers won all three games.

In 1991 he was 4-0 giving up nine runs in 36 innings including a 10 inning shutout in game seven of the World Series.

In 1992 a older Jack Morris was 10-2 from August 1st on helping the Blue Jays win their division.

His overall numbers are of the Palmer, Hunter, and Phil Niekro variety. Niekro won 318 and was an automatic selection just because he pitched so damn long. Morris dominated hitters and was one of the best pitchers in the game from 1982 to 1992 if not the best during those years. Moreover Blyleven and Niekro who has similar numbers pitched longer and never lead a decade of consistent and very above average pitching. You can name better pitchers from one or two years in this period but not better pitchers over that many years. Morris was never the best pitcher in any one season but he was the best over a decade.

He also perfected the split fingered fastball making him a modern day trailblazer and a clutch performer on baseball's biggest stage. He's no Carlton, Maddux, or Cy Young but what he was is one of the best pitchers of his generation if not the best over an entire decade. This was playing in a very hitter friendly parks in Detroit and Minnesota. Unlike Rice, Trammell, or any of the other candidates to include even Gossage who I love, Jack Morris was better than almost all of his peers during a ten to twelve year stretch and his career numbers although not eye popping, are good enough under the circumstances to get a bust in Cooperstown.

JACK F'N MORRIS TO THE HALL OF FAME BABY!

edited for effect

Since Dr. Detroit went through all the effort to document his homer case, I'll agree on purely an emotional level. Morris seemed like a hall of famer while he was active, although his peak and career numbers don't work on a purely quantitative basis.The Cat probably has a better chance of dropping off the ballot than getting in the Hall any time soon. His best hope is that his numbers pair up better in the future vs. pitchers of the steroid era, and that the writers get tired of voting in hitters year after year.

If you look at active pitchers, there aren't many with HoF credentials better than Morris. Clemens and Maddux certainly; Pedro, Johnson and Glavine probably; and maybe Smoltz for his versatility. But I'd match Jack's post season heroics against Schilling's bloody sock, and Morris arguably has better credentials than any other active pitcher.

All those guys you listed have better postseason numbers than Morris. All of them. Including Smoltz, Johnson, Pedro, Schilling, and Glavine.Post season ERA

Schilling-2.06

Smoltz-2.65

Maddux-3.34

Pedro-3.40

Glavine-3.42

Johnson-3.50

Clemens-3.71

Morris-3.80

World Series ERA, Morris comes in last amongst those fellas also.

Would you quit killing DD's arguement please.

good input here.

 

[Doctor Detroit]

Gossage

Gwynn

Morris

Ripken

Sorry Doc, but I just don't think Morris makes the cut...254 wins is solid, but a 3.90 ERA is just not HOF worthy, IMO, especially since it was pre-offensive explosion era baseball...

In fact, in the 11 seasons between his 25 year old seasonand his 35 year old season, he had a worse than league average ERA 4 times...

Gets points for his 91 series performance, but overall postseason #s are a solid but unspectacular 7-4, 3.80 ERA...

I'd put Blyleven in the Hall over Morris...

Alright I'm ready. Jack Morris should be in the Hall of fame for the following reasons:

He won 254 games more than Gibson, Ford, Hubbell, and Marichal . You can compare him to Blyleven but Blyleven pitched 22 years won 20 only once (that year he lost 17) and Bert had a bunch of middling seasons for 22 years. Morris threw 175 complete games and had 28 shutouts in five less years wining just 35 less games, and making the all star game five times

Morris finished in the top five in the Cy Young in 1981, 1983, 1991, and 1992.

2500 Ks (more than HOF Jim Palmer, Marichal, Grove and Catfish Hunter among others)

Lead the league in wins in 1981 and 1992

He won 15 games 12 times. He won 20 twice and never finished higher than 3rd in the Cy Young because of his ERA. Again you take the league av ERA and although Morris was only at +100 to +126 you have to consider the ballpark he played in and his road vs home ERA. Blyleven I believe suffers from his career ERA as well because he has similar ERA numbers.

But most importantly Jack Morris had his biggest games on baseball's biggest stage:

Take away the three losses in his final year with Toronto and he was 7-1 with dominate performances in two different World Series in 1984 and in 1991. In those two series' he had four wins, no losses, three complete games, and one of the three most memorable games in World Series history in game seven of the 1991 World Series throwing a CG shutout over ten freakin innings. It is the greatest pitching performance in World Series history because of that one extra inning and it was a game seven. Morris>Larson

Was he the best pitcher in the regular season? No. He played in two small ballparks for most of his career in Detroit and Minnesota and was expected to pitch deep into games. He had 15, 17, 9, 20,13, 15, 13 complete games in the prime of his career.

Also factor in things like how many innings he was having to pitch. IN 1986 he threw six CG shutouts and completed seven of his eight final games in a pennant race winning all but one of them of them. The only game he didn't complete he went 8.67 allowing six runs and eight hits. He got pulled because he got in trouble and for Jack Morris getting in trouble was six runs in the 9th. :X

In 1984 he threw a no hitter on three days rest against the White Sox in the first week of the season. He started that season 10-1 with 8 complete games! Tigers started 35-5 and he was a huge reason. He was 3-0 in the playoffs giving up five earned runs in 25 innings and the Tigers won all three games.

In 1991 he was 4-0 giving up nine runs in 36 innings including a 10 inning shutout in game seven of the World Series.

In 1992 a older Jack Morris was 10-2 from August 1st on helping the Blue Jays win their division.

His overall numbers are of the Palmer, Hunter, and Phil Niekro variety. Niekro won 318 and was an automatic selection just because he pitched so damn long. Morris dominated hitters and was one of the best pitchers in the game from 1982 to 1992 if not the best during those years. Moreover Blyleven and Niekro who has similar numbers pitched longer and never lead a decade of consistent and very above average pitching. You can name better pitchers from one or two years in this period but not better pitchers over that many years. Morris was never the best pitcher in any one season but he was the best over a decade.

He also perfected the split fingered fastball making him a modern day trailblazer and a clutch performer on baseball's biggest stage. He's no Carlton, Maddux, or Cy Young but what he was is one of the best pitchers of his generation if not the best over an entire decade. This was playing in a very hitter friendly parks in Detroit and Minnesota. Unlike Rice, Trammell, or any of the other candidates to include even Gossage who I love, Jack Morris was better than almost all of his peers during a ten to twelve year stretch and his career numbers although not eye popping, are good enough under the circumstances to get a bust in Cooperstown.

JACK F'N MORRIS TO THE HALL OF FAME BABY!

edited for effect

Since Dr. Detroit went through all the effort to document his homer case, I'll agree on purely an emotional level. Morris seemed like a hall of famer while he was active, although his peak and career numbers don't work on a purely quantitative basis.The Cat probably has a better chance of dropping off the ballot than getting in the Hall any time soon. His best hope is that his numbers pair up better in the future vs. pitchers of the steroid era, and that the writers get tired of voting in hitters year after year.

If you look at active pitchers, there aren't many with HoF credentials better than Morris. Clemens and Maddux certainly; Pedro, Johnson and Glavine probably; and maybe Smoltz for his versatility. But I'd match Jack's post season heroics against Schilling's bloody sock, and Morris arguably has better credentials than any other active pitcher.

All those guys you listed have better postseason numbers than Morris. All of them. Including Smoltz, Johnson, Pedro, Schilling, and Glavine.Post season ERA

Schilling-2.06

Smoltz-2.65

Maddux-3.34

Pedro-3.40

Glavine-3.42

Johnson-3.50

Clemens-3.71

Morris-3.80

World Series ERA, Morris comes in last amongst those fellas also.

I already addressed this but you took the opportunity to selectively read or ignore. Take out 1992 and the story is different. As far as your comparison consdier that Pedro Martinez has pitched in one World Series game and Maddux, Johnson, and Glavine all have losing records in the postseason. If you look at all of that then only Schilling and Smoltz stand better in playoff pitching and not by much. Most don't have "better" post season numbers unless you only consdier ERA which is apparently what you've done here. I guess since Clemens has an ERA worse than the ret taht they are all better playoff pitchers than he is. I'll take Clemens 12 playoff wins over Maddux's 11 because Roger has two rings and Maddux has one. In the 1984 and 1991 WS Morris was a combined 4-0 with a 1.54 ERA. He was a key clog in two World Series teams, the number one pitcher on his team, and a guy who pitched ten innings in a game seven. In 1992 he was not good in the playoffs and those numbers drag down his overall numbers. But his team did win in 92 so he can't be blamed for blowing any series but he sure can be credited with being a HUGE FACTOR in winning two championships for his teams in 1984 and 1991. Of the modern day pitchers you referred to only Schilling can say that IMO.

 

[mjm3773]

For me, Jack Morris is one of the easier no's (especially compared to someone like Bert Bleleven)

Yes, he did have some clutch postseason performances. But the Hall of Fame is a career award - and thus you have to evaluate his entire career. And quite frankly, all he was was a good pitcher - but far from great.

He had a career WHIP of 1.297. His career K:BB ratio is only 1.78. His career ERA+ is 105. Which means, adjusted for park and league, his ERA was just 5% better than an average pitcher for his career - hardly HoF material. Only six times in his career did he have a single-season ERA+ over 120, and never higher than 133.

In contrast, Blyleven's career WHIP is 1.198. He had a K:BB ratio of 2.80 (and his 5th all-time in strikeouts). His career ERA+ is 118. He had 11 seasons of an ERA+ higher than 120, including six higher than Morris's high of 133. Which is to say, an easy argument can be made that Blyleven had six seasons that were better than Morris's best season.

Morris was a good pitcher, who had the fortune to play for a number of very good teams and had some memorable postseason performances, however if he gets into the HoF, it's traveshamockery (not the worst in the history of the Hall, but one nonetheless).

 

[Funkley]

I don't disagree with what anyone is saying about Rice. It's just that he's one of a group of a few players who have been looked at as close but not quite. Rice, Dawson, Murphy and possibly even Dave Parker are all in the same 'class'. I think you either need them all or none of them. The best case that can be made for all of them is Duke Snider. If he's in, then the other's should be. I still think that they are close but not quite in.

 

[the moops]

Gossage

Gwynn

Morris

Ripken

Sorry Doc, but I just don't think Morris makes the cut...254 wins is solid, but a 3.90 ERA is just not HOF worthy, IMO, especially since it was pre-offensive explosion era baseball...

In fact, in the 11 seasons between his 25 year old seasonand his 35 year old season, he had a worse than league average ERA 4 times...

Gets points for his 91 series performance, but overall postseason #s are a solid but unspectacular 7-4, 3.80 ERA...

I'd put Blyleven in the Hall over Morris...

Alright I'm ready. Jack Morris should be in the Hall of fame for the following reasons:

He won 254 games more than Gibson, Ford, Hubbell, and Marichal . You can compare him to Blyleven but Blyleven pitched 22 years won 20 only once (that year he lost 17) and Bert had a bunch of middling seasons for 22 years. Morris threw 175 complete games and had 28 shutouts in five less years wining just 35 less games, and making the all star game five times

Morris finished in the top five in the Cy Young in 1981, 1983, 1991, and 1992.

2500 Ks (more than HOF Jim Palmer, Marichal, Grove and Catfish Hunter among others)

Lead the league in wins in 1981 and 1992

He won 15 games 12 times. He won 20 twice and never finished higher than 3rd in the Cy Young because of his ERA. Again you take the league av ERA and although Morris was only at +100 to +126 you have to consider the ballpark he played in and his road vs home ERA. Blyleven I believe suffers from his career ERA as well because he has similar ERA numbers.

But most importantly Jack Morris had his biggest games on baseball's biggest stage:

Take away the three losses in his final year with Toronto and he was 7-1 with dominate performances in two different World Series in 1984 and in 1991. In those two series' he had four wins, no losses, three complete games, and one of the three most memorable games in World Series history in game seven of the 1991 World Series throwing a CG shutout over ten freakin innings. It is the greatest pitching performance in World Series history because of that one extra inning and it was a game seven. Morris>Larson

Was he the best pitcher in the regular season? No. He played in two small ballparks for most of his career in Detroit and Minnesota and was expected to pitch deep into games. He had 15, 17, 9, 20,13, 15, 13 complete games in the prime of his career.

Also factor in things like how many innings he was having to pitch. IN 1986 he threw six CG shutouts and completed seven of his eight final games in a pennant race winning all but one of them of them. The only game he didn't complete he went 8.67 allowing six runs and eight hits. He got pulled because he got in trouble and for Jack Morris getting in trouble was six runs in the 9th. :X

In 1984 he threw a no hitter on three days rest against the White Sox in the first week of the season. He started that season 10-1 with 8 complete games! Tigers started 35-5 and he was a huge reason. He was 3-0 in the playoffs giving up five earned runs in 25 innings and the Tigers won all three games.

In 1991 he was 4-0 giving up nine runs in 36 innings including a 10 inning shutout in game seven of the World Series.

In 1992 a older Jack Morris was 10-2 from August 1st on helping the Blue Jays win their division.

His overall numbers are of the Palmer, Hunter, and Phil Niekro variety. Niekro won 318 and was an automatic selection just because he pitched so damn long. Morris dominated hitters and was one of the best pitchers in the game from 1982 to 1992 if not the best during those years. Moreover Blyleven and Niekro who has similar numbers pitched longer and never lead a decade of consistent and very above average pitching. You can name better pitchers from one or two years in this period but not better pitchers over that many years. Morris was never the best pitcher in any one season but he was the best over a decade.

He also perfected the split fingered fastball making him a modern day trailblazer and a clutch performer on baseball's biggest stage. He's no Carlton, Maddux, or Cy Young but what he was is one of the best pitchers of his generation if not the best over an entire decade. This was playing in a very hitter friendly parks in Detroit and Minnesota. Unlike Rice, Trammell, or any of the other candidates to include even Gossage who I love, Jack Morris was better than almost all of his peers during a ten to twelve year stretch and his career numbers although not eye popping, are good enough under the circumstances to get a bust in Cooperstown.

JACK F'N MORRIS TO THE HALL OF FAME BABY!

edited for effect

Since Dr. Detroit went through all the effort to document his homer case, I'll agree on purely an emotional level. Morris seemed like a hall of famer while he was active, although his peak and career numbers don't work on a purely quantitative basis.The Cat probably has a better chance of dropping off the ballot than getting in the Hall any time soon. His best hope is that his numbers pair up better in the future vs. pitchers of the steroid era, and that the writers get tired of voting in hitters year after year.

If you look at active pitchers, there aren't many with HoF credentials better than Morris. Clemens and Maddux certainly; Pedro, Johnson and Glavine probably; and maybe Smoltz for his versatility. But I'd match Jack's post season heroics against Schilling's bloody sock, and Morris arguably has better credentials than any other active pitcher.

All those guys you listed have better postseason numbers than Morris. All of them. Including Smoltz, Johnson, Pedro, Schilling, and Glavine.Post season ERA

Schilling-2.06

Smoltz-2.65

Maddux-3.34

Pedro-3.40

Glavine-3.42

Johnson-3.50

Clemens-3.71

Morris-3.80

World Series ERA, Morris comes in last amongst those fellas also.

I already addressed this but you took the opportunity to selectively read or ignore. Take out 1992 and the story is different. As far as your comparison consdier that Pedro Martinez has pitched in one World Series game and Maddux, Johnson, and Glavine all have losing records in the postseason. If you look at all of that then only Schilling and Smoltz stand better in playoff pitching and not by much. Most don't have "better" post season numbers unless you only consdier ERA which is apparently what you've done here. I guess since Clemens has an ERA worse than the ret taht they are all better playoff pitchers than he is. I'll take Clemens 12 playoff wins over Maddux's 11 because Roger has two rings and Maddux has one. In the 1984 and 1991 WS Morris was a combined 4-0 with a 1.54 ERA. He was a key clog in two World Series teams, the number one pitcher on his team, and a guy who pitched ten innings in a game seven. In 1992 he was not good in the playoffs and those numbers drag down his overall numbers. But his team did win in 92 so he can't be blamed for blowing any series but he sure can be credited with being a HUGE FACTOR in winning two championships for his teams in 1984 and 1991. Of the modern day pitchers you referred to only Schilling can say that IMO.

So you are saying Jack Morris should get in to the HOF because of his 4-0 record in the '84 and '91 World Series?Can I selectively pick out any two postseason series for the other guys mentioned?

Man, you love your Tigers, dont ya. You are all confused in your logic. You cite his 4-0 record in the world series, but in 1992 you blow off his win/loss record. You cant have it both ways...especially when you criticize Johnson, Maddux and Glavine for having losing records.

 

[Doctor Detroit]

Gossage

Gwynn

Morris

Ripken

Sorry Doc, but I just don't think Morris makes the cut...254 wins is solid, but a 3.90 ERA is just not HOF worthy, IMO, especially since it was pre-offensive explosion era baseball...

In fact, in the 11 seasons between his 25 year old seasonand his 35 year old season, he had a worse than league average ERA 4 times...

Gets points for his 91 series performance, but overall postseason #s are a solid but unspectacular 7-4, 3.80 ERA...

I'd put Blyleven in the Hall over Morris...

Alright I'm ready. Jack Morris should be in the Hall of fame for the following reasons:

He won 254 games more than Gibson, Ford, Hubbell, and Marichal . You can compare him to Blyleven but Blyleven pitched 22 years won 20 only once (that year he lost 17) and Bert had a bunch of middling seasons for 22 years. Morris threw 175 complete games and had 28 shutouts in five less years wining just 35 less games, and making the all star game five times

Morris finished in the top five in the Cy Young in 1981, 1983, 1991, and 1992.

2500 Ks (more than HOF Jim Palmer, Marichal, Grove and Catfish Hunter among others)

Lead the league in wins in 1981 and 1992

He won 15 games 12 times. He won 20 twice and never finished higher than 3rd in the Cy Young because of his ERA. Again you take the league av ERA and although Morris was only at +100 to +126 you have to consider the ballpark he played in and his road vs home ERA. Blyleven I believe suffers from his career ERA as well because he has similar ERA numbers.

But most importantly Jack Morris had his biggest games on baseball's biggest stage:

Take away the three losses in his final year with Toronto and he was 7-1 with dominate performances in two different World Series in 1984 and in 1991. In those two series' he had four wins, no losses, three complete games, and one of the three most memorable games in World Series history in game seven of the 1991 World Series throwing a CG shutout over ten freakin innings. It is the greatest pitching performance in World Series history because of that one extra inning and it was a game seven. Morris>Larson

Was he the best pitcher in the regular season? No. He played in two small ballparks for most of his career in Detroit and Minnesota and was expected to pitch deep into games. He had 15, 17, 9, 20,13, 15, 13 complete games in the prime of his career.

Also factor in things like how many innings he was having to pitch. IN 1986 he threw six CG shutouts and completed seven of his eight final games in a pennant race winning all but one of them of them. The only game he didn't complete he went 8.67 allowing six runs and eight hits. He got pulled because he got in trouble and for Jack Morris getting in trouble was six runs in the 9th. :X

In 1984 he threw a no hitter on three days rest against the White Sox in the first week of the season. He started that season 10-1 with 8 complete games! Tigers started 35-5 and he was a huge reason. He was 3-0 in the playoffs giving up five earned runs in 25 innings and the Tigers won all three games.

In 1991 he was 4-0 giving up nine runs in 36 innings including a 10 inning shutout in game seven of the World Series.

In 1992 a older Jack Morris was 10-2 from August 1st on helping the Blue Jays win their division.

His overall numbers are of the Palmer, Hunter, and Phil Niekro variety. Niekro won 318 and was an automatic selection just because he pitched so damn long. Morris dominated hitters and was one of the best pitchers in the game from 1982 to 1992 if not the best during those years. Moreover Blyleven and Niekro who has similar numbers pitched longer and never lead a decade of consistent and very above average pitching. You can name better pitchers from one or two years in this period but not better pitchers over that many years. Morris was never the best pitcher in any one season but he was the best over a decade.

He also perfected the split fingered fastball making him a modern day trailblazer and a clutch performer on baseball's biggest stage. He's no Carlton, Maddux, or Cy Young but what he was is one of the best pitchers of his generation if not the best over an entire decade. This was playing in a very hitter friendly parks in Detroit and Minnesota. Unlike Rice, Trammell, or any of the other candidates to include even Gossage who I love, Jack Morris was better than almost all of his peers during a ten to twelve year stretch and his career numbers although not eye popping, are good enough under the circumstances to get a bust in Cooperstown.

JACK F'N MORRIS TO THE HALL OF FAME BABY!

edited for effect

Since Dr. Detroit went through all the effort to document his homer case, I'll agree on purely an emotional level. Morris seemed like a hall of famer while he was active, although his peak and career numbers don't work on a purely quantitative basis.The Cat probably has a better chance of dropping off the ballot than getting in the Hall any time soon. His best hope is that his numbers pair up better in the future vs. pitchers of the steroid era, and that the writers get tired of voting in hitters year after year.

If you look at active pitchers, there aren't many with HoF credentials better than Morris. Clemens and Maddux certainly; Pedro, Johnson and Glavine probably; and maybe Smoltz for his versatility. But I'd match Jack's post season heroics against Schilling's bloody sock, and Morris arguably has better credentials than any other active pitcher.

All those guys you listed have better postseason numbers than Morris. All of them. Including Smoltz, Johnson, Pedro, Schilling, and Glavine.Post season ERA

Schilling-2.06

Smoltz-2.65

Maddux-3.34

Pedro-3.40

Glavine-3.42

Johnson-3.50

Clemens-3.71

Morris-3.80

World Series ERA, Morris comes in last amongst those fellas also.

I already addressed this but you took the opportunity to selectively read or ignore. Take out 1992 and the story is different. As far as your comparison consdier that Pedro Martinez has pitched in one World Series game and Maddux, Johnson, and Glavine all have losing records in the postseason. If you look at all of that then only Schilling and Smoltz stand better in playoff pitching and not by much. Most don't have "better" post season numbers unless you only consdier ERA which is apparently what you've done here. I guess since Clemens has an ERA worse than the ret taht they are all better playoff pitchers than he is. I'll take Clemens 12 playoff wins over Maddux's 11 because Roger has two rings and Maddux has one. In the 1984 and 1991 WS Morris was a combined 4-0 with a 1.54 ERA. He was a key clog in two World Series teams, the number one pitcher on his team, and a guy who pitched ten innings in a game seven. In 1992 he was not good in the playoffs and those numbers drag down his overall numbers. But his team did win in 92 so he can't be blamed for blowing any series but he sure can be credited with being a HUGE FACTOR in winning two championships for his teams in 1984 and 1991. Of the modern day pitchers you referred to only Schilling can say that IMO.

So you are saying Jack Morris should get in to the HOF because of his 4-0 record in the '84 and '91 World Series?Can I selectively pick out any two postseason series for the other guys mentioned?

Man, you love your Tigers, dont ya. You are all confused in your logic. You cite his 4-0 record in the world series, but in 1992 you blow off his win/loss record. You cant have it both ways...especially when you criticize Johnson, Maddux and Glavine for having losing records.

The 1992 playoffs is a side note and i included all my logic in the first posting as well as all the other factors which you simple ignored. I stated he was 7-4 and only mentioned he had a bad 1992 season but of course that is accounted for in HOF voting which is fine by me if you put him up against the other pitchers from 1980 to 1993. I wasn't the one who compared him to modern day pitchers you did. All those guys should be in the HOF with the exception of Schilling who looks like he will face the same fight as Jack has. It's also not about the Tigers because Morris pitched elsewhere and has his best moment as a Twin.

 

[the moops]

You are the one who brought up the active pitchers, not me.

 

[Doctor Detroit]

You are the one who brought up the active pitchers, not me.

Check again.

 

[the moops]

You are the one who brought up the active pitchers, not me.

Check again.

Ahh..I see. Wasnt me either

 

[Doctor Detroit]

You are the one who brought up the active pitchers, not me.

Check again.

Ahh..I see. Wasnt me either

:draw: Tie goes to the runner.

 

[oso diablo]

I'll give it a try.SS / 427 / 34 - RipkenOF / 399 / 30 - Gwynn1B / 343 / 30 - McgwireOF / 341 / 26 - DawsonSP / 339 / 23 - Tommy John?OF / 325 / 31 - Parker?SS / 318 / 29 - TrammellDH / 307 / 22 - Baines?OF / 292 / 32 - Belle?SP / 289 / 19 - Blyleven?1B / 280 / 25 - Mattingly?OF / 280 / 28 - Rice?SS / 278 / 24 - who's the other SS on the ballot?Man, that was harder than I thought. Pretty sure I got the first 4. Rice may be higher on the list, or not at all on the list. Trammell seems right too.How did I do?

pretty good. Doing this from memory right now, because i keep this stuff at home, but...Correct: Ripken, Gwynn, McGwire, Trammell, Baines, Mattingly, RiceIncorrect: the SPs, Belle (only about 240 career)The OFs on the list are Gwynn, Parker, Murphy, Dawson and Rice. I just can't remember the order of the middle 3 right now. Best guess is Dawson, Parker, Murphy.The 3rd SS is an interesting case, and why i extended the cutoff down to 275. Because he's thought of as a very good player, but he doesn't stand out in memories for some reason.

 

[guru_007]

I'll give it a try.SS / 427 / 34 - RipkenOF / 399 / 30 - Gwynn1B / 343 / 30 - McgwireOF / 341 / 26 - DawsonSP / 339 / 23 - Tommy John?OF / 325 / 31 - Parker?SS / 318 / 29 - TrammellDH / 307 / 22 - Baines?OF / 292 / 32 - Belle?SP / 289 / 19 - Blyleven?1B / 280 / 25 - Mattingly?OF / 280 / 28 - Rice?SS / 278 / 24 - who's the other SS on the ballot?Man, that was harder than I thought. Pretty sure I got the first 4. Rice may be higher on the list, or not at all on the list. Trammell seems right too.How did I do?

pretty good. Doing this from memory right now, because i keep this stuff at home, but...Correct: Ripken, Gwynn, McGwire, Trammell, Baines, Mattingly, RiceIncorrect: the SPs, Belle (only about 240 career)The OFs on the list are Gwynn, Parker, Murphy, Dawson and Rice. I just can't remember the order of the middle 3 right now. Best guess is Dawson, Parker, Murphy.The 3rd SS is an interesting case, and why i extended the cutoff down to 275. Because he's thought of as a very good player, but he doesn't stand out in memories for some reason.

Tony Fernandez?No idea what those stupid numbers mean anyway

 

[oso diablo]

Tony Fernandez?

No idea what those stupid numbers mean anyway

yes.you don't know that we're talking about Win Shares (as noted in the thread)? Or you don't understand Win Shares?

For the uninitiated, Win Shares purport to encapsulate into a single metric all the contributions to winning baseball games. Do you help your team win games? Not, do you wow the chicks with long balls? And not, can you compile 100+ RBI hitting in the 3 hole when the guys at 1 & 2 have high OBPs (which pretty much any baseball regular can do)? And not, can you morris 20 wins with an ERA over 4?

 

[opticution]

Tony Fernandez?

No idea what those stupid numbers mean anyway

yes.you don't know that we're talking about Win Shares (as noted in the thread)? Or you don't understand Win Shares?

For the uninitiated, Win Shares purport to encapsulate into a single metric all the contributions to winning baseball games. Do you help your team win games? Not, do you wow the chicks with long balls? And not, can you compile 100+ RBI hitting in the 3 hole when the guys at 1 & 2 have high OBPs (which pretty much any baseball regular can do)? And not, can you morris 20 wins with an ERA over 4?

I like the Win Shares concept and think it's as good as anything. It showed that Pujols absolutely deserved the NL MVP over Howard and that Morneau was a pretty shaky choice over Jeter.Steroids or not, it also shows how crazy good Bonds has been over his career.

 

[Thorn]

Tony Fernandez?

No idea what those stupid numbers mean anyway

yes.you don't know that we're talking about Win Shares (as noted in the thread)? Or you don't understand Win Shares?

For the uninitiated, Win Shares purport to encapsulate into a single metric all the contributions to winning baseball games. Do you help your team win games? Not, do you wow the chicks with long balls? And not, can you compile 100+ RBI hitting in the 3 hole when the guys at 1 & 2 have high OBPs (which pretty much any baseball regular can do)? And not, can you morris 20 wins with an ERA over 4?

Does it take into account that you hit behind Wade Boggs, a guy who got on base but had neither the speed nor the guts to break up a double play?

 

[Dave Baker]

One argument I despise is "if player X is in, so should player Y." First of all, just because the HOF made a mistake once, they should compound it and do it again?

Also, I still shudder at those that think numbers tell the whole story. Two players could have the exact numbers in every category, yet one was clutch and the other wasn't. One really helped the team become a winner, the other less so. There are a variety of ways a player contributes that can not be found at baseball-reference.com. It and people like Bill James are of great aid, but people need to look beyond the edge of their nose and try to grasp all involved.

There are extenuating circumstances with each situation.

 

[Thorn]

Tony Fernandez?

No idea what those stupid numbers mean anyway

yes.you don't know that we're talking about Win Shares (as noted in the thread)? Or you don't understand Win Shares?

For the uninitiated, Win Shares purport to encapsulate into a single metric all the contributions to winning baseball games. Do you help your team win games? Not, do you wow the chicks with long balls? And not, can you compile 100+ RBI hitting in the 3 hole when the guys at 1 & 2 have high OBPs (which pretty much any baseball regular can do)? And not, can you morris 20 wins with an ERA over 4?

I did not know that chicks were impressed by long balls.

 

[guru_007]

Tony Fernandez?

No idea what those stupid numbers mean anyway

yes.you don't know that we're talking about Win Shares (as noted in the thread)? Or you don't understand Win Shares?

For the uninitiated, Win Shares purport to encapsulate into a single metric all the contributions to winning baseball games. Do you help your team win games? Not, do you wow the chicks with long balls? And not, can you compile 100+ RBI hitting in the 3 hole when the guys at 1 & 2 have high OBPs (which pretty much any baseball regular can do)? And not, can you morris 20 wins with an ERA over 4?

I know what win shares, and understand the theory, frankly I just they're stupid. You cannot put into numbers intangibles. I watch a lot of baseball, I played a lot of baseball, I know quite a bit about baseball. I know who I think is a good player, great player, overrated, or what have you. It is absolutely impossible to compare two players that you've never watched play from 1975-1985 vs 1995-2005 using one set of metrics. It's an exercise of foolish proportions. People enjoy wasting their time on this, and that's fine. Two completely different eras in baseball.

 

[the moops]

Tony Fernandez?

No idea what those stupid numbers mean anyway

yes.you don't know that we're talking about Win Shares (as noted in the thread)? Or you don't understand Win Shares?

For the uninitiated, Win Shares purport to encapsulate into a single metric all the contributions to winning baseball games. Do you help your team win games? Not, do you wow the chicks with long balls? And not, can you compile 100+ RBI hitting in the 3 hole when the guys at 1 & 2 have high OBPs (which pretty much any baseball regular can do)? And not, can you morris 20 wins with an ERA over 4?

I know what win shares, and understand the theory, frankly I just they're stupid. You cannot put into numbers intangibles. I watch a lot of baseball, I played a lot of baseball, I know quite a bit about baseball. I know who I think is a good player, great player, overrated, or what have you. It is absolutely impossible to compare two players that you've never watched play from 1975-1985 vs 1995-2005 using one set of metrics. It's an exercise of foolish proportions. People enjoy wasting their time on this, and that's fine. Two completely different eras in baseball.

Tough day today?How do you suppose we compare players from a different era? Are you suggesting that we shouldn't? No arguments over who is better, Barry Bonds or Babe Ruth?

Isnt this part of the fun of sports? Debating how good players are today compared to 20 and 50 years ago?

No metric can give you a definitive answer as to who was better. However, the vast amount of statistical analysis (most of it park and era adjusted) gives a pretty good idea of how good and/or valuable players were. When you compare how much better player A was compared to other players in the same environment/era/etc you get a good grasp as to his value. You can do that a thousand times over, and it gives a pretty good picture.

 

[oso diablo]

One argument I despise is "if player X is in, so should player Y." First of all, just because the HOF made a mistake once, they should compound it and do it again?Also, I still shudder at those that think numbers tell the whole story. Two players could have the exact numbers in every category, yet one was clutch and the other wasn't. One really helped the team become a winner, the other less so. There are a variety of ways a player contributes that can not be found at baseball-reference.com. It and people like Bill James are of great aid, but people need to look beyond the edge of their nose and try to grasp all involved.There are extenuating circumstances with each situation.

I agree with you about the compounding mistakes thing. And i get, to borrow from a recent Rob Neyer article about the AL MVP, that you're an Intuitionist on these matters, railing against the Empiricists. On most things in life, i'm a big-time intuitionist, but baseball, with its individual moments, lends itself to much more empiricism than most sports. Certainly more than any team sport of consequence.And i find that arguments to the "intangibles" or its popular cousin "clutch" are typically ways to introduce bias into the mix. Or a convenient crutch when the numbers just don't measure up. Our feelings and memories are just not reliable enough.No one is suggesting that we simply establish a baseline for Win Shares or VORP or WARP3 or whatever, and say everyone above this line is in, and so sorry to rest of you. Metrics are information, highly pertinent information for arguments about which player was better. A great starting point. Not the final arbiter, but it would be even more foolhardy to ignore them.

 

[Hov34]

This thread gets:

1/2

 

[Drunken Cowboy]

Hopefully McGwire won't get in on the first ballot.

All pro athletes take steriods. Get over it.Do you know why the PGA doesn't want to test? It is because they will catch people.

 

[oso diablo]

for reference, here are the voting totals from last year. always a good barometer to see what might happen this year. New candidates Gwynn & Ripken are locks. Do the two batters keep Rice in the wings yet again? Probably. You might see a pitcher - Goose or Blyleven - jump up.

Name Votes PCT

Bruce Sutter 400 76.9

Jim Rice 337 64.8

Rich Gossage 336 64.6

Andre Dawson 317 61

Bert Blyleven 277 53.3

Lee Smith 234 45

Jack Morris 214 41.2

Tommy John 154 29.6

Steve Garvey 135 26

Alan Trammell 92 17.7

Dave Parker 75 14.4

Dave Concepcion 65 12.5

Don Mattingly 64 12.3

Orel Hershiser 58 11.2

Dale Murphy 56 10.8

Albert Belle 40 7.7

p.s. sorry about the formatting. tried that code thing, but still didn't work right.

 

[oso diablo]

Looking over time at a few of the top returning candidates and their voting histories.

Player & % of votes, starting with the 2006 ballot, and going back in time

Rice: 65, 60, 55, 52, 55, 58, 52

Rice has had solid, consistent support, but there's been no groundswell. And as noted in post above, the presence of Gwynn & Ripken may be enough to keep him under 75% once again.

Gossage: 65, 55, 41, 42, 43, 44, 33

Goose has jumped 14 points in the last 2 elections. A similar jump in 07 would be enough. There are probably enough voters who fall prey to the "if x got in, then you gotta vote for y" fallacy, and will point to Sutter's election last year. It's understandable, because Gossage had a much better career than did Sutter. It's just that Sutter's election was a mistake, imo. Gossage deserves to be in Cooperstown, don't get me wrong. It's just that he should be elected on his own merit, and not because Sutter got in.

Dawson: 61, 52, 50, 50, 45

A bit of a surge last year that i bet levels off this year. Hard to see him jumping ahead of Rice.

Blyleven: 53, 41, 35, 29, 26, 24, 17

The Dutch curveball master has improved every election. Will the surging campaign be enough?

 

[opticution]

Gossage: 65, 55, 41, 42, 43, 44, 33

Goose has jumped 14 points in the last 2 elections. A similar jump in 07 would be enough. There are probably enough voters who fall prey to the "if x got in, then you gotta vote for y" fallacy, and will point to Sutter's election last year. It's understandable, because Gossage had a much better career than did Sutter. It's just that Sutter's election was a mistake, imo. Gossage deserves to be in Cooperstown, don't get me wrong. It's just that he should be elected on his own merit, and not because Sutter got in.

Sutter will help his chances dramatically, I think. What puzzles me is how easily Fingers got in:

Rollie Fingers

Year Election Votes Pct

1991 BBWAA 291 65.69

1992 BBWAA 349 81.16

His second time around he had 81%. Gossage is probably a better pitcher overall and is struggling to make his case. Maybe his 22 years in the league are actually hurting him?

 

[Dave Baker]

One argument I despise is "if player X is in, so should player Y." First of all, just because the HOF made a mistake once, they should compound it and do it again?Also, I still shudder at those that think numbers tell the whole story. Two players could have the exact numbers in every category, yet one was clutch and the other wasn't. One really helped the team become a winner, the other less so. There are a variety of ways a player contributes that can not be found at baseball-reference.com. It and people like Bill James are of great aid, but people need to look beyond the edge of their nose and try to grasp all involved.There are extenuating circumstances with each situation.

I agree with you about the compounding mistakes thing. And i get, to borrow from a recent Rob Neyer article about the AL MVP, that you're an Intuitionist on these matters, railing against the Empiricists. On most things in life, i'm a big-time intuitionist, but baseball, with its individual moments, lends itself to much more empiricism than most sports. Certainly more than any team sport of consequence.And i find that arguments to the "intangibles" or its popular cousin "clutch" are typically ways to introduce bias into the mix. Or a convenient crutch when the numbers just don't measure up. Our feelings and memories are just not reliable enough.No one is suggesting that we simply establish a baseline for Win Shares or VORP or WARP3 or whatever, and say everyone above this line is in, and so sorry to rest of you. Metrics are information, highly pertinent information for arguments about which player was better. A great starting point. Not the final arbiter, but it would be even more foolhardy to ignore them.

I'm with you on a lot of this, and I agree that it's a mistake to completely ignore numbers. Some of that as instinctive for me. I'm already aware of the numbers and don't need to review them, especially out of the need to compare with others.To me, it's not that hard to tell when a certain player takes over the game, or in some situations at least his position, and dominated the landscape. Numbers don't always go there.One decent example (and I just thought of this, there could be plenty of holes in this argument) might be between Tony Perez and Steve Garvey. Perez is in, Garvey is not, yet when they played, I never thought of Perez as being the better player. Perez was terrific but Garvey was the Dodgers. They were nothing without him then. Yet when looking at their career ending numbers, Garvey's are dwarfed by those of Perez, and Perez sits in the HOF.Frankly, I'm not sure if either really belongs, but everything within me tells that Garvey was a lot more valuable when he played than Perez. If anyone belongs, it's Garvey. Which speaks about how I personally view the HOF in general. Numbers simply don't tell the story and career cumulative numbers tend to especially warp the story.

 

[guru_007]

GossageGwynnRiceRipken

I agree completely with these.Ripken and Gwynn are no brainers.If McGwire gets into the hall of fame at all, it's a ####### sham.

BUMPINGLet's do this! RICE FOR HOF

 

[Doctor Detroit]

GossageGwynnRiceRipken

I agree completely with these.Ripken and Gwynn are no brainers.If McGwire gets into the hall of fame at all, it's a ####### sham.

BUMPINGLet's do this! RICE FOR HOF

Rice has about the same chance as Don Mattingly. Best of luck.

 

[guru_007]

GossageGwynnRiceRipken

I agree completely with these.Ripken and Gwynn are no brainers.If McGwire gets into the hall of fame at all, it's a ####### sham.

BUMPINGLet's do this! RICE FOR HOF

Rice has about the same chance as Don Mattingly. Best of luck.

We'll see about that.Also read that next year's ballot will be extremely weak, Tim Raines and Dave Justice headline the first ballot guys. Might be Jack Morri's only chance