If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Deadspin)   Baseball Hall of Fame research expert with an .806 prediction average reveals who is getting in this year   (deadspin.com) divider line 74
    More: Interesting, Baseball Hall of Fame, Mike Mussina, Greg Maddux, Tom Glavine, HOF, predictions  
•       •       •

1660 clicks; posted to Sports » on 18 Dec 2013 at 3:31 AM (32 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



74 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-12-18 11:45:55 AM

Night Night Cream Puff: skeeterjennings: And Nolan Ryan is the most over-rated player in the history of the game.

That's a mighty interesting claim. Would you care to elaborate? I'm honestly interested because that's the first time I've ever heard somebody say that.


Most strikeouts in history.  Also the most walks.  In fact, he has 50% more walks than the next highest pitcher.  Why did he get so many strikeouts?  Because he was just rearing back and gunning it.  Sometimes it was a strike, sometimes it was a ball.  Well, lots of times for both.

And his win/loss records aren't that impressive.  Yes, 324 wins is.  But versus 292 losses?  Longevity.  Look at them year by year: 1966: 0-1;  1968:  6-9;  1969:  6-3;  1970:  7-11;  1971:  10-14;  1972:  19-16.  1973:  21-16;  1974:  22-16;  1975:  14-12;  1976:  17-18;  1977:  19-16;  1978:  10-13;  1979:  16-14;  1980:  11-10;  1981:  11-5:  1982:  16-12;  1983:  14-9;  1984:  12-11;  1985:  10-12;  1986:  12-8;  1987:  8-16;  1988:  12-11;  1989:  16-10;  1990:  13-9;  1991:  12-6;  1992:  5-9;  1993:  5-5.

Yes, 7 no hitters is insane, but as he never really had a dominant season.  Strikeouts made it hard to hit, but the walks made it easier to beat him.  Good pitcher.  Maybe very good.  MAYBE Hall-worthy.  But not by any means close to the most dominant pitcher.  Not in the same ballpark.
 
2013-12-18 11:48:45 AM

Gosling: Super Chronic: OK, and no pitcher with an ERA as high as 3.90 has gotten in. Something's gotta give, eh?

Well, I'm using the more directly relevant stat, because this is, in fact, a vote, and that vote percentage is the single most important stat here. I didn't say right away. Maybe he waits a long time. Maybe he sits for 20, 30 years on the Veterans Committee until he becomes the cause du jour. Maybe he goes in posthumously. But he eventually goes in.


Or maybe people get smarter and smarter as better analysis proliferates. I wouldn't have thought Bert Blyleven would have a shot based on his early showing, but enough voices spoke out that he made it. Maybe we've heard enough about Morris -- and frankly, it's been discussed to death -- that those who haven't voted for him continue not to do so, and maybe even some of his proponents decide to back off. I mean, in our current era we've seen Felix Hernandez win the Cy Young Award with 13 wins, which would have been unthinkable but for the more advanced analysis that's out there today. I don't see why we need to accept that historical patterns will continue.
 
2013-12-18 12:08:29 PM
Waiting for DWM's grandma to weigh in before deciding.
 
2013-12-18 12:15:06 PM

roc6783: Waiting for DWM's grandma to weigh in before deciding.


Well, considering he died when Jack Morris was 10 years old, we're gonna need a Ouija board.
 
2013-12-18 12:15:18 PM

Super Chronic: Or maybe people get smarter and smarter as better analysis proliferates. I wouldn't have thought Bert Blyleven would have a shot based on his early showing, but enough voices spoke out that he made it. Maybe we've heard enough about Morris -- and frankly, it's been discussed to death -- that those who haven't voted for him continue not to do so, and maybe even some of his proponents decide to back off. I mean, in our current era we've seen Felix Hernandez win the Cy Young Award with 13 wins, which would have been unthinkable but for the more advanced analysis that's out there today. I don't see why we need to accept that historical patterns will continue.


Which would be a good point if you were talking about Lee Smith, who's largely been glued to the 40's over his time on the ballot. But Morris' vote trajectory has been steadily climbing. Morris' totals over the years read: 22.2,19.6, 20.6, 22.8, 26.3, 33.3, 41.2, 37.1, 42.9, 44.0, 52.3, 53.5, 66.7, 67.7. It's one of the quirks of the voters. When you get as close as Morris is, what tends to happen is the leaners start lining up behind you to push you over the finish line. Peer pressure starts working in your favor, as the people who still say no to you have to endure a larger and larger amount of ridicule from the proponents until they finally crack. A lot of the time, when you finally go over 75%, you go WAY over, because a lot of the voters don't want to be the last guy on the bandwagon.
 
2013-12-18 12:47:22 PM

DeWayne Mann: roc6783: Waiting for DWM's grandma to weigh in before deciding.

Well, considering he died when Jack Morris was 10 years old, we're gonna need a Ouija board.


ummm, what?
 
2013-12-18 12:50:05 PM

Uncle Pooky: DeWayne Mann: roc6783: Waiting for DWM's grandma to weigh in before deciding.

Well, considering he died when Jack Morris was 10 years old, we're gonna need a Ouija board.

ummm, what?


You heard me.
 
2013-12-18 12:54:47 PM

Dinobot: And Jack Morris was possibly the best pitcher of his era, and won't go in.


No he wasn't, not even close.
 
2013-12-18 02:04:44 PM
Still waiting to see all BBWAA voters pass a drug test.
 
2013-12-18 02:31:42 PM

ManateeGag: red5ish: Frank Thomas (two MVPs, 521 homers, .301 batting average)
Tom Glavine (two Cy Youngs, 305 wins)
Historically these guys qualify.
Is the Hall broken?

love or hate his political leanings, Olbermann did a store on how broken the hall is a couple weeks ago.  and he spoke a little about this last night.  Regardless of what kind of left wing loon he is, the guy knows his baseball.


Are you referring to his piece where he compares the Hall to a banana republic? That is classic Olbermann (whom I dislike for his bombastic hyperbole, not for his political positions). I think he made some good points but it wasn't what I'd call an exhaustively reasoned exposition. Personally I believe the Hall is broken and has been for quite some time. As a result I can't get very emotional about the way it's being run, or who is being inducted. The BBWAA's handling of the steroids era has, frankly, been a disgusting display of hypocrisy and false moralizing. The writers,who were in close contact with the players and coaches during the steroids era, whose daily job was to talk with them and write about them, would like us to believe they had no idea, not a clue, about what was going on, and are outraged about PEDs and are now punishing the players. It's incredible.
 
2013-12-18 03:00:05 PM
I would invite the BBWA to shove their heads up their asses, but seeing as how that is already done, I invite them to swivel their necks around.

Biggio needs to get in this year at a minimum. Add Maddux and Big Hurt too. Glavine can wait a year
 
2013-12-18 03:02:33 PM

lacydog: And the fact that Mussina is on the list means nothing. Every hall of fame ballot has some laughable additions to it. Did you know that someone once cast a vote for David Segui? It's not just that he was on the ballot... HE GOT A VOTE!


Note that inclusion on the ballot is a formality- you merely need to be retired 5 years and played for 10 years.  That's it.  There is no "nomination" process.

Then, if you get less than 5% of the vote, you're kicked off for good.
 
2013-12-18 03:31:46 PM

downstairs: Note that inclusion on the ballot is a formality- you merely need to be retired 5 years and played for 10 years.  That's it.  There is no "nomination" process.


Actually, there is a screening committee, and I think there's a nomination process within that committee.
 
2013-12-18 03:46:13 PM

GQueue: downstairs: Note that inclusion on the ballot is a formality- you merely need to be retired 5 years and played for 10 years.  That's it.  There is no "nomination" process.

Actually, there is a screening committee, and I think there's a nomination process within that committee.


Hmmmm... I just looked this up, and you're right.  Apparently you just need two committee members to be nominated onto the ballot.  So its pretty lax.

But I stand corrected that its a free-for-all.
 
2013-12-18 04:17:21 PM

steamingpile: Dinobot: And Jack Morris was possibly the best pitcher of his era, and won't go in.

No he wasn't, not even close.


People think because he pitched a great Game Seven (sob) that that means he should be in the hall.
 
2013-12-18 04:31:48 PM
I'll admit to being a homer here, but I want to see Biggio and Bagwell both make it this year.  The fact that Bagwell had to wait this long is already a joke.  And if Frank Thomas gets voted in but Bagwell doesn't...  well, I can't be held responsible for my actions.

/Not saying Thomas doesn't deserve it, he absolutely does, but voting for Thomas and not voting for Bagwell would be extremely hypocritical
 
2013-12-18 06:59:13 PM

KingKauff: People think because he pitched a great Game Seven (sob) that that means he should be in the hall.


And his game seven wasn't even that great

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=15836
 
2013-12-18 07:42:13 PM

ElwoodCuse: KingKauff: People think because he pitched a great Game Seven (sob) that that means he should be in the hall.

And his game seven wasn't even that great

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=15836


Shut your mouth. It was the best pitched game in World Series history....... if you ignore all the other World Series games that had better pitching performances
 
2013-12-19 12:18:59 AM
Why do we even need this crappy voting system?  Either they qualify or they don't.  Put them on a ballot for one year, up/down, yay/nay.  Everyone is either a first ballot HOFer or a "sorry Charlie".  No more "penalizing" players for not being as good as Ty Cobb, or holding grudges over petty disagreements in a player's behavior or attitude towards the media.  In fact, make half of the vote based on a statistical analysis of the player's career versus his contemporaries.  Some players would be a shoo-in for that, and some very good players would need some popular support to make it.  But in theory everyone who deserves to be in, will get in on a regular basis.
 
2013-12-19 12:22:42 AM

red5ish: he BBWAA's handling of the steroids era has, frankly, been a disgusting display of hypocrisy and false moralizing.


It's the 'Baseball' HoF, not the 'BBWA Popularity' HoF, or even, 'Upstanding Citizen' Baseball HoF.

Hell, Ty Cobb was a 'peach'; a real SoB. But that SoB could fricking play baseball.

Regardless of their 'sins', I'd put them in - if it makes the BBWA feel better, design their shrine to include all their known and implied 'warts'.

Shoeless Joe
Pete
Barry
Roger

In the context of Baseball did I really need to add their last names? Regardless what you think of them personally, they were upper tier HoF players. (And there is more than one name above that seems to me to be a major asshat; but they were great ball players.)

As far as the other toxic players, Mark McGwire put a lot of butts in seats at a time when baseball was in trouble. I'm not even going to try and use stats; there are a lot of you out there that are much better at it than I am. Feel free to grind an axe either way.

As far as this year... Maddox. I'd be happy for Biggio if he got in. I'd guess Glavine next year; Moose in a couple more years (always liked watching him pitch).

/Different sport, but honestly: do you think OJ should be stripped from the College/Pro Football HoF? Did you see him run in college? Greatest college running back I ever saw...
//yeah I'm old. '67 USC/UCLA football game... brilliant.
 
2013-12-19 12:43:19 AM
They should do the following:

If you vote for a guy who gets 3 or less votes, you should have to publically justify your decision or forfeit the right to vote

I woudl love to read an explanation for voting Aaron Sele and Eric Young into the HOF. I also think any voter who doesn't vote Maddux into the HOF should be stripped of their right to vote. If you are so married to "tradition" that you can't vote a guy in who had an ERA that was almost half of the league ERA during a 7 year stretch... The rest of his career was roughly equivalent to Jack Morris. What could possibly be the rationale behind not voting Greg Maddux into the HOF

Besides either A: the stupid "I'm not voting for anyone from the mid  90s because steroids tainted the league or B: the even stupider, we can't all vote someone into the HOF, because that didn't happen 70 years ago, either argument is ridiculous
 
2013-12-19 05:21:12 AM

ToastmasterGeneral: Night Night Cream Puff: skeeterjennings: And Nolan Ryan is the most over-rated player in the history of the game.

That's a mighty interesting claim. Would you care to elaborate? I'm honestly interested because that's the first time I've ever heard somebody say that.

Most strikeouts in history.  Also the most walks.  In fact, he has 50% more walks than the next highest pitcher.  Why did he get so many strikeouts?  Because he was just rearing back and gunning it.  Sometimes it was a strike, sometimes it was a ball.  Well, lots of times for both.

And his win/loss records aren't that impressive.  Yes, 324 wins is.  But versus 292 losses?  Longevity.  Look at them year by year: 1966: 0-1;  1968:  6-9;  1969:  6-3;  1970:  7-11;  1971:  10-14;  1972:  19-16.  1973:  21-16;  1974:  22-16;  1975:  14-12;  1976:  17-18;  1977:  19-16;  1978:  10-13;  1979:  16-14;  1980:  11-10;  1981:  11-5:  1982:  16-12;  1983:  14-9;  1984:  12-11;  1985:  10-12;  1986:  12-8;  1987:  8-16;  1988:  12-11;  1989:  16-10;  1990:  13-9;  1991:  12-6;  1992:  5-9;  1993:  5-5.

Yes, 7 no hitters is insane, but as he never really had a dominant season.  Strikeouts made it hard to hit, but the walks made it easier to beat him.  Good pitcher.  Maybe very good.  MAYBE Hall-worthy.  But not by any means close to the most dominant pitcher.  Not in the same ballpark.


Please point out anyway in either my post or the post I quoted where being "dominant" was the point of contention. My question was about being "the most over-rated." The first thought that pops into mind with Ryan is "strikeout king" which implies he struck a lot of people out. That's it. Ryan was the proto-type of the modern day power pitcher in many ways, but like many proto-types there are still plenty of flaws.

Also, win/loss record is one of those iffy stats to look at, especially if a pitcher is on a horrible team. His best years (wins wise) were mostly with the Angels in the 70s and 6 of those 8 years the team had a losing record. To me a more telling stat to look at is Complete Games and Shutouts. In his 13 years in Boston Clemens had 100 CG and 38 SHO. In 8 years in CA, on an arguably worse team, Ryan had 136 CG and 40 SHO. Now, looking at those numbers who would you say was the more "dominant?" But, this is why using stats alone is silly.

Being inducted into the Hall of Fame should be about achievements in baseball and 300+ wins, 7 no hitters,  and being the all time strike out leader is more than enough to get him in. Now, was Ryan the greatest pitcher to ever live? No. I'd be in agreement if that were the argument.

Check out this link http://www.baseball-reference.com/friv/ratings.cgi  to see how a community project is working to rank the best pitchers of all time. The top 10 all time is pretty solid. Maddux is there. Ryan is not. Seems about right :-)
 
2013-12-19 10:21:03 AM

SCUBA_Archer: Why do we even need this crappy voting system?  Either they qualify or they don't.  Put them on a ballot for one year, up/down, yay/nay.  Everyone is either a first ballot HOFer or a "sorry Charlie".  No more "penalizing" players for not being as good as Ty Cobb, or holding grudges over petty disagreements in a player's behavior or attitude towards the media.  In fact, make half of the vote based on a statistical analysis of the player's career versus his contemporaries.  Some players would be a shoo-in for that, and some very good players would need some popular support to make it.  But in theory everyone who deserves to be in, will get in on a regular basis.


What you'd have is a completely different class of people who get in. All those 'petty disagreements' would absolutely get punished by lifelong banishment from the Hall, which means Roberto Alomar would never get into the hall because of that one time he spit on an ump, and Juan Marichal would never get in because of the Johnny Roseboro incident. Also, Eddie Cicotte would stand an improved chance of getting in despite the fact that unlike Shoeless Joe, he absolutely goddamned meant to throw the World Series.

It should also be mentioned that a whole lot of the voters don't even use all 10 of those slots on the ballot. A good chunk of the voters absolutely refuse to put in ANYONE on the first ballot. They'd never vote anyone in again. They'd just padlock the doors and let the place sepia-tone itself to death.
 
2013-12-19 02:32:47 PM

Tired_of_the_BS: Regardless of their 'sins', I'd put them in - if it makes the BBWA feel better, design their shrine to include all their known and implied 'warts'.


While I agree with you I confess I am not optimistic about this happening and, as I wrote earlier, I no longer have much of an emotional investment in seeing the HoF "fixed" after decades of mismanagement. I too am old and more than a little jaded.
 
Displayed 24 of 74 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report