deck Whitman said:
outofplace said:
Why do people keep bringing up Buehrle in Hall of Fame discussions? A very average pitcher at best. Not even close to being a Hall of Famer.
He's better than you think. He has 46.2 WAR as we speak, should easily get to 200 wins, and is only 32 years old with no injury history whatsoever.
I know what you're saying. ERA always around 3.80-4.00. No dominant seasons. Not a high-strikeout guy. Definitely doesn't feel like a HOFer. And, ultimately, probably not one. But definitely better than average.
'definitely better than average' is light years from the hof, in my book. mussina's credentials are better than cone or hershiser's, imo. i know wins-losses are minimized more and more these days,, but cone having only five seasons with 15 or more victories in a hindrance. i get that his 5 world series rings are impressive, but at least two of his yankee rings had little to do with his contribution.
but i can see the support growing for cone and orel down the road, as fewer and fewer starting pitchers compile numbers comparable to theirs. that will help pettitte eventually, too. all of 'em are more 'hall of very good' guys, though, in my opinion.
interesting thing that cone is already off the ballot due to lack of support, considering he was beloved by the baseball writers who covered him regularly. i'd have thought that would've been more of a plus for him. maybe that sends a message that i have trouble quibbling with -- that the hof is for the most extraordinary players of their era.
i'm much more in favor of 'tough grading' than 'easy grading' when it comes to the hof.