hall of fame, next vote...

If CC doesn’t get in, the bar for the new generation is going to be really high. Pitchers with 70+ WAR won’t come up like it used too.

Great pitchers are the exception to whatever prevailing trends are around, so I don't know if usage patterns will much affect the existence or 70+ guys or not. Verlander's there, Greinke and Kershaw are about to be, Scherzer's close to a sure bet, Sale has a good shot, and Hamels, deGrom, Strasburg, Cole, Nola, and who knows who else are making realistic progress.

Not sure how that would compare to a snapshot of 1998 or 1984...There'll be more than that lost '80s generation of starters, for sure.

I don’t see how pitchers pitching fewer innings *couldn’t* lead to fewer guys passing a certain threshold...WAR is a counting stat after all

I'd want two or three seasons where you're viewed as one of the best (half-dozen?) in the game.

From 2007-9 he was certainly one of the best two or three pitchers in the game.

(xpost) I should have been clearer--when a Verlander or Scherzer comes along, they don't follow the prevailing trends.

He averaged > 6 WAR from 2007-2011, he was as dominant and consistent (230+ IP) as anyone in the game at his peak.

xpost

(xpost) True:

Sabathia -- 18.2
Greinke -- 18.0
Lincecum -- 17.5
Halladay -- 16.7
Santana -- 15.4
Beckett -- 14.8

I used the bWAR total for those three years (checked about a dozen pitchers...may have missed someone).

I have one foot dangling off the fence, pointing in the direction of Cooperstown.

he was as dominant and consistent (230+ IP) as anyone in the game

Consistent definitely. Dominant relative to the league--he totals 30.4 bWAR for those five years, 6.1 a year, which is a moderate HOF peak.

You're making a good case...maybe the thing that gets in the way for me is that he's only somewhat effective after the age of 31. Whether it should or shouldn't be, that's always a stumbling block for me.

Verlander's there, Greinke and Kershaw are about to be, Scherzer's close to a sure bet, Sale has a good shot, and Hamels, deGrom, Strasburg, Cole, Nola, and who knows who else are making realistic progress.

Hamels seems like at best an extreme long shot and at worst a no-brainer to be outside the HOF. His WAR is good but I don’t think any voters are gonna be inspired to look closely at him, barring a late career renaissance. He’s kinda the Ian Kinsler of hurlers.

Despite my comments CC is one of those guys who could get in and I’d be totally okay with it, he was obviously great for a period of time and while not up there with some of these guys it’s not like he’s Jack Morris. A compiler in a lot of ways but ultimately, whatever. Definitely Pettitte-like for his career but yeah, better.

What I mean by on the fence--if he gets, I'm fine with that. Honestly, I can't even get worked up about Harold Baines' induction. As I've said before, I simultaneously a) find HOF arguments extremely interesting and b) just don't care.

In relation to CC, though, I wouldn't be so quick to discount Hamels. Except for wins (huge advantage CC) and IP (ditto), Hamels has him beat in some key categories: WHIP, K/BB, ERA, ERA+, and FIP. He's just barely behind in bWAR (62.5-58.7), and--the key difference--Hamels is still pitching pretty well. Hamels is a free agent, so I don't know where (or if) he'll land, but he pitched 140 effective innings last year at age 35. His peak (2010-2014) is, as Karl Malone might say, a little less peaky than CC (27.2 bWAR, 5.4 per season), but for his career, he's been more consistent than CC.

Jaffe's assessment of CC sounds right: "...while he’s a bit short in the JAWS department, his milestones and the esteem with which he’s held will probably win the day."

http://blogs.fangraphs.com/cc-sabathias-storied-career-reaches-a-rough-ending/

Per Fangraphs, he’s as good as Glavine.

fp for bumping during a championship game

.... and not mentioning Altuve.

The Hall of Fame’s 2020 Modern Baseball Era ballot features Dwight Evans, Steve Garvey, Tommy John, Don Mattingly, Marvin Miller, Thurman Munson, Dale Murphy, Dave Parker, Ted Simmons and Lou Whitaker. Results to be announced Dec. 8 on @MLBNetwork #HOF2020 https://t.co/xlF1wuPg15 pic.twitter.com/jCrDFWqyMP

— National Baseball Hall of Fame and Museum ⚾ (@baseballhall) November 4, 2019

some of the nominees deserve it by any standard (miller, whitaker, a couple borderline cases), and almost all deserve it by the harold baines standard

So happy that Anthony the cop from states island finally gets to celebrate Donnie baseball’s HOF entry

Baseball Reference career WAR:

Marvin Miller- Literally BILLIONS $$$ in the players pocket.
Lou Whitaker 75.1
Dwight Evans 67.1
Tommy John 61.5
Ted Simmons 50.1
Dale Murphy 46.5
Thurman Munson 46.1
Don Mattingly 42.5
Dave Parker 40.1
Steve Garvey 38.1

If you think star power especially in the 70s and 80s, you would probably flip that list.

Bobby Grich 71.1
Bobby Bonds 57.9
Chet Lemon 55.6

Chris Speier is a player who I remember as a longtime coach and remember his baseball cards, but he was a better player than I thought. He was pretty awesome when he first game up, check out his 1972-74. I guess I was thinking he was a hitter like other longtime Giant shortstop Johnny LeMaster, who definitely was a good with the glove not the bat.

That's a good ballot in that three of the players have had very vocal support from saber-leaning advocates (Whitaker, Evans, and Simmons), John and Murphy have had longtime, more traditional support, and Munson does well analytically for a short career (5.1 WAR per 650 PA on Baseball Reference). Garvey, Parker, and Mattingly are the more old-school, black-ink/RBI kind of players who don't do especially well analytically, but Parker and Mattingly had great, meteoric peaks, and Garvey...was consistent through the '70s.

Obviously Miller should have been inducted long ago.

It’s pretty interesting as a baseball fan to see how the ‘80s stars have fared. When I was a kid, Murphy and Mattingly, Parker and Garvey were to an extent legends at that point, and Dwight Evans was this consistently great hitter and had that cannon arm. And none of them got close to getting in. I think there’s sort of a bit of backlash not against the analytics movement but in terms of how many of those guys were overlooked. You probably saw that with Baines and Smith getting in and if they got in, no way most if not all of the above guys do as well. I’m squarely “pro” on several, neither here nor there on others, and Steve Garvey just seems like a key party Michael Young to me.

Funny (had to read that last sentence twice before I got it). The best defense I can make for Garvey--clearly he was wildly overrated in his heyday--is the same one you'd make for the wildly overrated Joe Carter: predictability/consistency/durability. You knew Garvey and Carter would play every day, and you knew you could pencil in 200 H/100 RBI for the former, and 30 HR/100 RBI for the latter. I know--the durability and the bulk numbers work in tandem, and both guys killed you on OBP and defense (seem to remember that Garvey's gold gloves were a joke). But as James wrote in one of the Abstracts (or a little later, maybe, back-stepping a bit on Garvey), GMs try to put together a million moving parts to get a winning team, and if one of those parts is close to 100% reliable, that's valuable in and of itself.

Got looking closer to understand the difference in WAR between Dwight Evans and Dave Parker. Looking at the WAR numbers on their site, Parker definitely drags in d-war later in his career, but surprisingly Evans d-War numbers are not really as good as one might expect. Pretty much both of them were considered of having one of the best throwing arms in the game at one point in their career and both spent considerable time at first and DH (less for Dewey though). The big thing seems to be the o-war numbers Dewey put up between age 35-40 being where he passed up Parker by so much.

The thing that catches me is comparing straight 1985 and 86 between both of them. By surface numbers, both had good season but it seems that Evans with 50 walks and more runs yet somewhat comparable other numbers (Parker has a higher slugging 1 season), his O-War is like twice as much.

i am by no means going to campaign for dave parker, but

MVP
two batting titles
three gold gloves
three silver sluggers
seven all-star games
that fucking throw in the all-star game
greatest nickname
greatest baseball portrait
greatest surname

Also (Wikipedia): "In the early 1970s, as a member of the Pirates AAA minor league ball team Charleston (WV) Charlies, Parker hit a home run that landed on a coal car on a passing train and the ball was later picked up in Columbus, Ohio."

Even after his death, Miller was rejected twice by these committees so it's not a slam dunk he'll be elected this time.

When I was a kid, Murphy and Mattingly, Parker and Garvey were to an extent legends at that point

Definitely, it was generally assumed that they were slam dunk future HOFers at the time. As good as Evans and Whitaker were, they weren't superstars, so if they're elected then the old school voters will say how can they be in but Mattingly isn't, and they'll have a point. There's a strong peak value vs career value argument to be made.

that fucking throw in the all-star game

Had to look into this--my first year of university, so I doubt very much that I watched that year. I assume you mean throwing Downing out at home. There were two great throws he made that game--he also threw Rice out at third trying to stretch a bloop double.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1PH6XJypKno

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1PH6XJypKno

Oops.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Jn9e1f0pa4

Definitely, it was generally assumed that they were slam dunk future HOFers at the time. As good as Evans and Whitaker were, they weren't superstars, so if they're elected then the old school voters will say how can they be in but Mattingly isn't, and they'll have a point. There's a strong peak value vs career value argument to be made.

― NoTimeBeforeTime, Tuesday, November 5, 2019 1:20 AM (ten hours ago) bookmarkflaglink

also as far as the '80s go, a lot of the great starting pitchers from that decade have also largely been locked out from the Hall. i think the only truly "his peak was the '80s" pitcher who's in is Morris, right? Clemens obv not in now, Ryan was very good but the '70s is where he dominated, Carlton won a couple Cys early that decade but he was a '70s guy, Blyleven wasn't as great as he was in the '70s, Sutton and Perry and Jenkins and Palmer and Niekro were occasionally effective but winding down etc. the reasons have a bit to do with injuries and shorter careers, it's less a protest i'd make and more an "interesting note" and "unfortunate fact".

I think Dave Stieb still has a very, very good argument. Steve Rogers is a guy I remember thinking felt like the best pitcher in the league, but his career was short. Gooden obv an all-timer for a minute. Soto, Saberhagen, Viola, Hershiser, Sutcliffe, Tudor, Valenzuela, etc....these guys had some peaks that were HOF-level. cf a whole lot of Cliff Lee/Johan Santana/Tim Lincecum/Brandon Webb/Chris Carpenter/Adam Wainwright types. Not a lot of supreme inner circle HOF types.

this will come out looking great, right? fWAR leaders, 1980-1989

Rank	Name	WAR	W	L	IP	K/9	BB/9	HR/9	BABIP	LOB%	ERA	FIP
1	Nolan Ryan	43.7	122	104	2094	9.31	3.84	0.55	0.27	72.30%	3.14	2.83
2	Bert Blyleven	37.7	123	103	2078.1	6.41	2.41	0.92	0.281	73.20%	3.64	3.56
3	Jack Morris	36.9	162	119	2443.2	6	3.16	0.97	0.262	73.70%	3.66	3.9
4	Dave Stieb	36.4	140	109	2328.2	5.33	3.19	0.71	0.256	74.10%	3.32	3.78
5	F Valenzuela	36.2	128	103	2144.2	6.9	3.52	0.56	0.276	73.20%	3.19	3.21
6	Roger Clemens	35.5	95	45	1284.2	8.51	2.6	0.67	0.281	74.70%	3.06	2.79
7	Mike Witt	34.5	109	104	1945	5.87	2.98	0.77	0.287	71.10%	3.78	3.62
8	Dwight Gooden	34.3	100	39	1291	8.14	2.64	0.45	0.276	75.60%	2.64	2.53
9	Steve Carlton	34	104	84	1732.1	7.55	3.28	0.7	0.291	71.60%	3.48	3.19
10	Bob Welch	32.5	137	93	2082.2	6.3	2.88	0.67	0.273	74.70%	3.21	3.35
11	Bret Saberhagen	29.6	92	61	1329	5.89	1.75	0.71	0.275	72.60%	3.23	3.11
12	Mike Moore	28.7	85	107	1698.2	5.88	3.27	0.85	0.289	69.70%	4.13	3.83
13	D Eckersley	28.7	88	88	1593.2	5.7	1.71	0.96	0.277	69.90%	3.89	3.48
14	Rick Rhoden	28.5	109	100	1918.1	5.12	2.8	0.65	0.292	72.30%	3.65	3.53
15	Rick Reuschel	28.3	97	82	1616.1	4.68	2.17	0.55	0.283	72.60%	3.27	3.3
16	Frank Viola	28	117	98	1858	6.23	2.65	1.06	0.285	73.10%	3.84	3.84
17	Ron Guidry	28	111	72	1639.2	6.18	2.26	0.99	0.28	73.60%	3.66	3.57
18	Orel Hershiser	28	98	64	1457	6.25	2.68	0.46	0.264	74.80%	2.69	3.01
19	Mike Scott	27.7	114	90	1803.2	6.61	2.68	0.7	0.269	71.30%	3.42	3.24
20	Floyd Bannister	27.1	112	109	1890.2	6.45	2.93	1.11	0.274	71.80%	3.98	3.95

....almost. move the column headers for WAR and everything else one to the right, please.

but anyway, floyd bannister was not a name i expected in the top 20!

Mike Witt!

I guess Ryan was maybe better in the ‘80s? Weird though I mean at least half a dozen of the other non-HOF guys felt like the best pitcher in the game for a minute or a bit longer. Saberhagen was incredible.

Between the early-mid 70's Carlton/Seaver/last of the 300 IP hurlers era and the 90's Maddux/Glavine/Smoltz era, a lot of pitchers were great for a few years and flamed out. There's also Ron Guidry in addition to the guys you named. I don't know if they've been locked out of the Hall, but something weird was happening in the 80's where all the best pitchers had no longevity and somehow only Jack Morris and Frank Tanana were left standing. There are too many of these pitchers over too many years to say it's just a coincidence, but I've never seen a convincing explanation. One explanation: for or most of baseball history, even the very good teams were built from stars and scrubs, and there were always weak hitting middle infielder types who you could get out without using maximum effort. That was changing by the 80's, but it was before the more modern understanding of pitcher development with pitch counts and innings limits, so a lot of great pitchers simply flamed out too soon. And that's how we end up with Jack Morris as the HOF representative for the era. How can this be corrected? I'm not sure.

The 80's were so messed up that Vuckovich, Hoyt, and a whole bunch of closers all won Cy Young awards, but Dave Stieb didn't. Stieb was still great into his 30's and was settling into that Maddux post-2000 phase of his career where he could pitch forever and get by on his smarts, but the back injury ended his career almost overnight. Even so, he's got a better HOF case than most of his peers.

As a kid I always thought Stieb was the best pitcher in the AL maybe because it seemed like he started every all star game during his peak (I’m definitely aware he probably didn’t btw). However he didn’t have enough wins and also his mustache was not Earnhardty enough to impress sportswriters like Morris’ did. But his five best bWAR seasons are way beyond Morris’ best.

and yet, he ended up with the second most wins of the 80s (140)! basically it just comes down to the mustache

wins were hard to come by in the '80s! if Stieb stuck around for another 4-5 seasons injury-free and cleared 200 he'd have that plus i'm sure a vv solid career WAR. or he might fall into Kevin Brown purgatory.

i'd be curious to see if in the future some other guys with these amazing brief meteoric peaks get more consideration. i'm not opposed to the notion that peak value should be heavily revisited when it comes to guys like Hershiser and Will Clark and other stars from the '80s.

orel doesn't really have the overall numbers but i think there's a lot to be said for having that scoreless streak + being the only guy to win NLCS/ALCS/WS MVPs etc

he may have really hurt himself by trying to squeeze out that last season (24.2 IP, -2.0 bWAR!)

You can make a career argument for Will Clark, too, if you don't penalize him for retiring at 36 instead of padding his numbers--his bWAR is 56.5. Actually, if you look at his career box, I think he's more of a career than peak guy (three or four years tops).

Clark had the misfortune of seeming to have peaked early and instead of becoming this perennial 35-40 homer guy, he wound up being a perfectly excellent John Olerud-type first baseman in an era when his contemporaries like Palmeiro and McGriff really padded their power stats, and younger hitters like Bagwell and Thomas put up those Jimmie Foxx stats across the board. he didn't really decline as much as he missed some time due to injuries. he was pretty consistent up to the end, he was always a great and patient hitter. if anything i think his outlier power season in 1987 made his subsequent career seem disappointing rather than borderline HOF.

would be curious to see how many players set a career high in homers in '87.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EJq7bOxUwAA_Fwh?format=png&name=small

vote jose valverde

Incredible to me that cliff lee has been retired for 5 years

seems probable that only one player from this list will make it, w/the next most likely i think remaining Walker (who really needs a push and a campaign he may not receive) followed by Schilling, who is still such a piece of shit that i think ppl might make him wait awhile longer.

Walker needs a really big push, I don't see it happening and it is tragic.

it's so crazy to me that it's completely non-baseball-related stuff that's keeping schilling out

b-ref's sean forman says he's not voting for jetes (because he will vote strategically for 10 players who need it more)

Putting PED guys to one side (because I hate talking about the subject), I'd vote for Jeter, Schilling, Walker, and Helton. I'm on the fence with Rolen; not sure why, but there's something that seems diffuse about his career. If he goes in eventually, that's fine.

My Just Jeter Hall of Fame ballot for 2020. #keepthehallsmall pic.twitter.com/lFEOfqLhxO

— steven marcus (@newsdayalum) November 21, 2019