Baseball Hall of Fame Elections Announced

[CTWarrior]

Randy Johnson, Pedro Martinez, John Smoltz and Craig Biggio.  Good class and will help clear up the ballot for Piazza and maybe Bagwell and Raines next year.

Only major quibble is that I think Schilling > Smoltz. 

[Texas Western]

Piazza was the best hitting catcher ever, and one of the best hitters period. I think the whole steroids thing is unfairly tainting him.

[MerrittsMustache]

Johnson and Pedro are no-brainers.

Smoltz belongs in the Hall of Really Good.

Biggio belongs in the Hall of Guys Who Stuck Around Long Enough to Reach a Milestone Number.

[CTWarrior]

Piazza was the best hitting catcher ever, and one of the best hitters period. I think the whole steroids thing is unfairly tainting him.

Not sure about unfairly (it's only unfair if he didn't use steroids), but he was up to just shy of 70% will get in next year.

[🏀]

Johnson and Pedro, no doubt.

Personally think Smoltz wasn't a first ballot guy.

Piazza will end up like Biggio, both have their question marks, both end up in the Hall.

I always wanted to throw a inside heater at Biggio's ribs.

[WI inferiority Complexes]

With four going in and Don Mattingly now off the ballot, there is something like 2000 more votes excised for the next few years. Guys like Piazza, Mussina, Shilling and Bagwell are going to get a lot more love in the near future.

[Lighthouse 84]

I know I may be in the minority here, but I actually don't think Pedro is HOF material.  Yes he was dominant for 7 years, but does that make him a HOF-er? He won 20 games only twice and only had 219 wins. He at least shouldn't have been a first ballot HOF-er.

I see the standards as being way too easy in today's BB HOF world.

[GGGG]

I know I may be in the minority here, but I actually don't think Pedro is HOF material.  Yes he was dominant for 7 years, but does that make him a HOF-er? He won 20 games only twice and only had 219 wins. He at least shouldn't have been a first ballot HOF-er.

I see the standards as being way too easy in today's BB HOF world.

Pedro Martinez is the most dominating starting pitcher of his generation.  He is easily deserving, and IMO more deserving than Randy Johnson (who is also obviously deserving IMO too.)

His career ERA of 2.95 is better than any starting pitcher of the last 30 years except Clayton Kershaw.  Johnson's is 3.29.  Maddux is 3.15.  Furthermore, at his peak, 1997-2003, he was going against the "steroid era" hitters.

Don't go by wins and accumulation stats.

[brandx]

Furthermore, at his peak, 1997-2003, he was going against the "steroid era" hitters.

Of course, he may have been a "steroid era" pitcher.

[GGGG]

Of course, he may have been a "steroid era" pitcher.

I mean, I obviously don't know for sure, but did you ever see a picture of him?

[brandx]

I mean, I obviously don't know for sure, but did you ever see a picture of him?

He was super skinny as a young guy. He was only skinny as he got older

[🏀]

Check out Pedro's WHIP from 1997 to 2005. That's first ballot HOF.

And please, please do not ever use wins to evaluate a pitcher.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Wins can be a misnomer.  Depends a lot on your team, your bullpen, your own offense, etc.  Nolan Ryan didn't have the best winning percentage, but I believe he has the worst batting average against in history for a pitcher. 

Each year a bunch of guys have more wins than normal because they're getting some obscene run support despite their own crappy ERA, just as there are tough luck guys with a great ERA but no run support.

For Biggio....I don't get too upset about players that pile up numbers over longevity.  I think longevity isn't the most important thing, but there is a certain consideration that makes it important in some cases.  I wouldn't hold a short career against someone either.  Biggio also made the all-star team in three different positions, which isn't the easiest thing to do.

[keefe]

Pedro Martinez is the most dominating starting pitcher of his generation.  He is easily deserving, and IMO more deserving than Randy Johnson

Oh yea? How many combat kills does Pedro have?

[Lennys Tap]

And please, please do not ever use wins to evaluate a pitcher.

I'm all for using advanced metrics to help evaluate players but as long as wins (and not run differential, cumulative WAR or something else) determine who takes the World Series every year, wins definitely count when evaluating starting pitchers. Nolan Ryan's metrics were really good because when he was "on" he was head and shoulders better than anyone in the game, but he found a way to lose a lot of close games when he wasn't overpowering. I know some say that's all luck and no clutch but I don't for a minute believe it. Given his large sample size there were other factors at work making him almost mediocre in the W/L column whether he pitched for good teams or bad ones.

As for Pedro, he's a well deserved first ballot Hall of Famer.

[MUsoxfan]

The HOF has always overvalued wins for pitchers. That being said, all 4 guys deserved it.

Schilling, Moose, Bags and Piazza will get in hopefully next year

[GGGG]

I'm all for using advanced metrics to help evaluate players but as long as wins (and not run differential, cumulative WAR or something else) determine who takes the World Series every year, wins definitely count when evaluating starting pitchers.

The problem with wins in a nutshell...

**Pitcher A goes 5 innings, is up 7-5 when he leaves, and the team goes on to win the game - a win.

**Pitcher B goes 9 innings and loses 1-0 - a loss.

Wins are too heavily dependent on what the pitcher's offense does.  Half the game is out of their control.  IMO ERA is by far the best way to determine a pitcher's value. 

[MerrittsMustache]

For Biggio....I don't get too upset about players that pile up numbers over longevity.  I think longevity isn't the most important thing, but there is a certain consideration that makes it important in some cases.  I wouldn't hold a short career against someone either.  Biggio also made the all-star team in three different positions, which isn't the easiest thing to do.

Biggio never made the All-Star team as an OF, only C and 2B. In fact, he only made 7 All-Star Games over a 20-year career. That means that he for nearly two-thirds of his career, he wasn't one of the 2-3 best players at his position in his league, let alone one of the best players in the game. That's NOT the career of a HOFer. I realize that ASGs are not the be-all, end-in in terms of HOF candidacy but those numbers are very telling.

[MerrittsMustache]

The problem with wins in a nutshell...

**Pitcher A goes 5 innings, is up 7-5 when he leaves, and the team goes on to win the game - a win.

**Pitcher B goes 9 innings and loses 1-0 - a loss.

Wins are too heavily dependent on what the pitcher's offense does.  Half the game is out of their control.  IMO ERA is by far the best way to determine a pitcher's value. 

In 1998, Kevin Tapani won a career-high 19 games while having a the third-worst ERA (4.85) of his 16-year career.

In 2001, Jon Lieber had a 3.80 ERA and won 20 games. In 2002, he had a 3.70 ERA and won 6 games.

The Win stat for pitchers is vastly overrated.

[Lennys Tap]

The problem with wins in a nutshell...

**Pitcher A goes 5 innings, is up 7-5 when he leaves, and the team goes on to win the game - a win.

**Pitcher B goes 9 innings and loses 1-0 - a loss.

Wins are too heavily dependent on what the pitcher's offense does.  Half the game is out of their control.  IMO ERA is by far the best way to determine a pitcher's value. 

No stat is perfect, they're all "unfair" to a certain extent. Is it more fair to compare a San Diego Padre pitcher to a Colorado Rockies pitcher by ERA or wins? The leading winners in the NL and Al the last five years (including ties) are:

NL - Kershaw (2),  Wainwright (2), Zimmerman, Gio Gonzalez, Halladay
AL - Scherzer (2), Weaver (2), Price, Verlander, Kluber, Felix Hernandez.

I know sabermatricians aren't too fond of Weaver (and maybe Gio?) but I think that's a pretty good list. There's a reason why Nolan Ryan was never more than 6 games over .500 in a season (in over 25 years) and that he mirrored his team's record rather than exceeding them. And it wasn't bad luck.

[g0lden3agle]

I know sabermatricians aren't too fond of Weaver (and maybe Gio?) but I think that's a pretty good list. There's a reason why Nolan Ryan was never more than 6 games over .500 in a season (in over 25 years) and that he mirrored his team's record rather than exceeding them. And it wasn't bad luck.

Isn't this exactly what people are referring to when they say you shouldn't be using Wins to evaluate a pitcher?  Wins involve way more team-related variables than simply how good a pitcher is, and as such should not be weighted heavily when comparing pitching stats.

[brandx]

The problem with wins in a nutshell...

**Pitcher A goes 5 innings, is up 7-5 when he leaves, and the team goes on to win the game - a win.

**Pitcher B goes 9 innings and loses 1-0 - a loss.

Wins are too heavily dependent on what the pitcher's offense does.  Half the game is out of their control.  IMO ERA is by far the best way to determine a pitcher's value. 

While Wins really aren't reflective of much in today's game they were very reflective historically. In the past, good starting pitchers did not just pitch 5 or 6 innings in a game. 20+ complete games was not an unusual statistic. So Wins DID reflect a pretty accurate value of a pitcher. They were not dependent on the bullpen.

[CTWarrior]

No stat is perfect, they're all "unfair" to a certain extent. Is it more fair to compare a San Diego Padre pitcher to a Colorado Rockies pitcher by ERA or wins? The leading winners in the NL and Al the last five years (including ties) are:

NL - Kershaw (2),  Wainwright (2), Zimmerman, Gio Gonzalez, Halladay
AL - Scherzer (2), Weaver (2), Price, Verlander, Kluber, Felix Hernandez.

I know sabermatricians aren't too fond of Weaver (and maybe Gio?) but I think that's a pretty good list. There's a reason why Nolan Ryan was never more than 6 games over .500 in a season (in over 25 years) and that he mirrored his team's record rather than exceeding them. And it wasn't bad luck.

I like ERA+, which compares your ERA to league ERA based on ballpark.  It allows you to compare pitchers from different ballparks and eras on a level playing field.

Last 5 years Leaders
2014 - AL Chris Sale (178 - which means his ERA adjusted for park is 78% better than league average), NL Clayton Kershaw (197)
2013 - AL Felix Hernandez (176), NL Clayton Kershaw (194)
2012 - AL Justin Verlander (161), NL Clayton Kershaw (150)
2011 - AL Justin Verlander (172), NL Roy Halladay (163)
2010 - AL Clay Buchholz (187), NL Josh Johnson (180)

Normally the leader is a very recognizable star pitcher.  2010 was an oddball year, but Buchholz (17-7, 2.33 174 IP) and Johnson (11-6 2.30 184 IP) didn't throw a ton of innings and did pitch extremely well.

Pedro Martinez from 1997 to 2003 (219, 163, 243, 291, 188, 202, 211) was other-worldly good.  Nobody's ever had a 7 year streak like that.  And if you take away those 7 years his ERA+ for his career is (122) still better than Nolan Ryan (112), Don Sutton (108) Catfish Hunter (104) and a slew of other Hall of Famers.  154 for his career is best ever for a starting pitcher.  Pedro lacks innings of some of those guys, but he is a no-doubt HOFer.

[🏀]

Wins are terrible. You might as well put a dunce cap on if you're evaluating pitchers today as your baseball opinion means nothing.

ERA/WHIP are good, fantasy advice, draft on WHIP.

ERA+ is the bee's knees.

[reinko]

Wins are terrible. You might as well put a dunce cap on if you're evaluating pitchers today as your baseball opinion means nothing.

ERA/WHIP are good, fantasy advice, draft on WHIP.

ERA+ is the bee's knees.

Like most HOF voters, I use the eye test.  And whether or not they could have gotten a fastball by Stan Musial.