David Cone and Orel Hershiser

[outofplace]

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.

He's an innings-eater who has the occasional streak of brilliance. Not even close to elite. Maybe average isn't quite fair, but it's closer to the truth than Hall of Fame.

 

[Dick Whitman]

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.

He's an innings-eater who has the occasional streak of brilliance. Not even close to elite. Maybe average isn't quite fair, but it's closer to the truth than Hall of Fame.

You're probably right. Like I said, I was watching him pitch tonight and was curious about where he stood. Didn't say that I ended up on his bandwagon.

 

[YGBFKM]

Once again, you construct an argument no one's making. There's a whole lot of landscape in between "average" and "elite." Buehrle has started All-Star Games, thrown a no-hitter, thrown a perfect game. His career has not been in the vicinity of average.

 

[shockey]

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.

 

[sgreenwell]

Once again, you construct an argument no one's making. There's a whole lot of landscape in between "average" and "elite." Buehrle has started All-Star Games, thrown a no-hitter, thrown a perfect game. His career has not been in the vicinity of average.

He strikes me as the pitching version of Fred McGriff. A very nice player, one that can start for pretty much any playoff team. Both will also pile up a ton of good counting stats, because they don't get injured. However, it's hard to point out a three to five year peak where they were really the best in the game. The only time Buehrle even got a top five finish in the Cy Young vote according to B-R was in 2005. No ERAs under 3.00 ever. If he has another 10 years like this, then he has a bizarre career line that makes for an interesting HoF argument (namely, 22 seasons of average to above average production).

Cone's problem is that he comes just short of the HoF from a length standpoint. From 1988 to 1995, he had around 200 IP a year, with a good ERA and an impressive amount of strikeouts. He had another mini-peak from 1997 to 1999, before a ho-hum couple of final years. I think he has a stronger case for inclusion than Buehrle, but if it took Bert so long to get elected, I think both are longshots.

 

[outofplace]

Once again, you construct an argument no one's making. There's a whole lot of landscape in between "average" and "elite." Buehrle has started All-Star Games, thrown a no-hitter, thrown a perfect game. His career has not been in the vicinity of average.

Try actually reading the thread before jumping in next time. deck brought him up for Hall of Fame consideration, so at least one person did suggest him as elite.

Part of the All-Star game is simply being a fast starter. heck, one of his "All-Star" seasons, Buehrle ended up 12-13 with a 4.99 ERA. Not a bad pitcher, but not somebody who has any business in a Hall of Fame discussion.

 

[Rhody31]

Once again, you construct an argument no one's making. There's a whole lot of landscape in between "average" and "elite." Buehrle has started All-Star Games, thrown a no-hitter, thrown a perfect game. His career has not been in the vicinity of average.

He strikes me as the pitching version of Fred McGriff. A very nice player, one that can start for pretty much any playoff team. Both will also pile up a ton of good counting stats, because they don't get injured. However, it's hard to point out a three to five year peak where they were really the best in the game. The only time Buehrle even got a top five finish in the Cy Young vote according to B-R was in 2005. No ERAs under 3.00 ever. If he has another 10 years like this, then he has a bizarre career line that makes for an interesting HoF argument (namely, 22 seasons of average to above average production).

Cone's problem is that he comes just short of the HoF from a length standpoint. From 1988 to 1995, he had around 200 IP a year, with a good ERA and an impressive amount of strikeouts. He had another mini-peak from 1997 to 1999, before a ho-hum couple of final years. I think he has a stronger case for inclusion than Buehrle, but if it took Bert so long to get elected, I think both are longshots.

That's a bad comparison. McGriff was a significantly better hitter than Buerhle a pitcher.

 

[Boom_70]

David Wells has 239 wins with WARP of 51

 

[Steak Snabler]

Hershiser was a fantastic pitcher from 1984-89, then blew his shoulder out and was merely pretty good for another decade.

 

[MankyJimy]

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.

We agree on something!

And I say no on Hershiser, yes to Cone. Hershiser had too many mediocre seasons.

 

[qtlaw]

Hershiser was outstanding for about 4 years, then was so-so thereafter. Yes he had a tremendous peak, and while he had a fairly long career, he was not Koufax dominant for that peak. The streak was amazing and he willed the Dodgers to the WS victory (oh yeah plus that stupendous pairing of Gibson and Hatcher in the 4 hole.)

Cone was a very good pitcher but hardly dominant (unfortunately his Cy Young came in '94 and while he went 20-3 that year, it unfortunately was '88 when Hershiser had his career year.)

 

[Armchair_QB]

Hershiser, with his scoreless inning streak, has the equivalent of Joe DiMaggio's 56-game hitting streak. And from 1985-88, he was the best pitcher in the National League. Only four years, but without him, the Dodgers don't win the World Series in '88. The Dodgers don't get past the Mets in the NLCS and probably don't even make the playoffs. His 1988 season was one of the greatest in the history of baseball.
The pitcher I want to see in the Hall of Fame who probably won't ever make it is Jack Morris. He was probably the best pitcher in the decade of the 1980s, but is never in the discussion.

Morris turned in the greatest Game 7 pitching performance in World Series history. If he'd done it for the Yankees instead of the Twins he'd already be in.