David Cone and Orel Hershiser

[CarltonBanks]

To me, somebody probably needs to have a stretch in their career that at least resembles Hershiser's 85-88 stretch to be HOF material unless their accumulated stats just knock your socks off (a slightly more significant version of McGriff).

Hershiser's four-year stretch was just greatness. It was doomed to end though because his delivery was so odd it put all that torque on the shoulder and the rotator cuff injury was probably an inevitability given the pressure his delivery put on his shoulder. For the life of me, I don't see how he managed to pitch as long as he did without needing Tommy John surgery too because it just looked like there was all sorts of stress on the elbow in his delivery.

Of all the non-HOF mentioned in this thread, he's by far the best if you take them all at their peak (possible exception of Morris?). But I say that as somebody who, at the time, was a Dodgers fan (not so much any more).

bullspit. take a look at guidry's fiver years ('77-'81) and get back to me. add two more great 20-plus win seasons after that and you get SEVEN hof-worthy seasons. is gator the victim of yankee backlash? so many folks here falsely believe n.y. players are over-hyped and often unworthy of awards they receive; i'd argue the opposite is true.

seriously. examine gator's year-by-year numbers and get back to us. you'll be wowed, i promise you. i'm not a big compiler's guy. i like my hof'ers to have truly DOMINATED for a length of time. guidry certainly did that. also factor in pitching in the a.l. vs. n.l. factor. much like pedro's astounding numbers with thr bosox, having a season with a 1.78 era in the a.l. is AMAZING when you're facing lineups w/o a pitcher, which has a great impact on era and strikeout numbers.

guidry's era was sub-3.00 in four of his first 5 seasons. (i included the strike-shortened '81, when he was 11-5 with a 2.76, among his hof-worth seasons):

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/g/guidrro01.shtml

anyone who makes a case for herhiser damn well better put guidry in first. any way you slice it, he was the more dominant pitcher, both at their 'peaks' and in terms of longevity. want to talk about 'criminal?' look at guidry's numbers and ask why didn't he get more support?

I didn't notice Guidry mentioned on this thread. Yes Guidry compares favorably to Hershiser, but I was just comparing to other pitchers mentioned on this thread and I hadn't noticed Guidry's name come up.

Edit to add: Be careful with your bullspits. When I posted, I don't believe Guidry's name had come up yet (perhaps I'm mistaken) and I clearly stated the qualifier "of pitchers mentioned on this thread" or something of that sort. I stand by my post.

I'll add that Hershiser's dominant stretch covered my high school years into my early college years, which also meant it covered the time I was a high school/Legion player and very much invested in the game so in terms of my generation, he was of significant influence. Somebody mentioned his two .500 seasons in that stretch. To me, W-L is a bit overrated for a pitcher. In that same stretch, Nolan Ryan had a year where he had a 2.76 ERA, struck out 270 in 211 2/3 innings and somehow managed to go 8-16 (for the Astros in 1987). That was great, Hall of Fame pitching. If a hitter hits two home runs and his team loses 11-8, he had a great day. But if a pitcher tosses a two-hitter, strikes out 12 and loses 1-0, we say "but he lost."

Agree about the W/L record being overrated. Look at Justin Masterson this year, 9-7 with a 2.69. Hershiser was great for the Indians in 1995 as well...those who did not cover or follow that team do not know how critically important he was to the rest of his team.

 

[BYH]

This thread has good but ultimately meaningless debate. We're not talking about guys who have been on the ballot gaining steam, or at least remaining on the periphery of the discussion, a la Blyleven a few years back or Raines and Morris and Lee Smith now. We're talking about guys who were to the HOF what Ralph Nader is to the presidential election (and I hate that analogy, b/c none of these guys deserve to be lumped in with Ralph Nader in anything, but oh well). Here's the peak percentage of the vote enjoyed by these guys:

Cone: 3.9%***
Hershiser: 11.2%
Guidry: 8.8%
Brown: 2.1%***

Cone and Brown were off after one year. Hershiser saw his votes plummet by more than 50 percent in his second and final year on the ballot. Guidry hung around for about a decade.

These guys (with the possible exception of Brown) would be sure-fire HOFers in this were football, which tends to reward seismic yet brief achievement (see Namath, Joe). That of course is understandable given the short lifespan of a football player, and why Kurt Warner is going to sail into the HOF in his first few years of eligibility while Cone, Hershiser and Guidry will never sniff election.

As for Buerhle, he'd be a real interesting guy if he stuck around another 10 years b/c he seems like the type who could churn out 15-10, 4.00 ERA seasons well into his 40s. (Freaky--just looked him up and his 162-game average is 15-11, 3.80) But he's talked of retirement already, and while I imagine he signs another deal as a free agent this winter, I don't see him sticking around nearly long enough to test out the whole "300 is automatic" hypothesis. He'll probably win 200 but that won't get him into the conversation.

 

[BrianGriffin]

This thread has good but ultimately meaningless debate. We're not talking about guys who have been on the ballot gaining steam, or at least remaining on the periphery of the discussion, a la Blyleven a few years back or Raines and Morris and Lee Smith now. We're talking about guys who were to the HOF what Ralph Nader is to the presidential election (and I hate that analogy, b/c none of these guys deserve to be lumped in with Ralph Nader in anything, but oh well). Here's the peak percentage of the vote enjoyed by these guys:

Cone: 3.9%***
Hershiser: 11.2%
Guidry: 8.8%
Brown: 2.1%***

Cone and Brown were off after one year. Hershiser saw his votes plummet by more than 50 percent in his second and final year on the ballot. Guidry hung around for about a decade.

These guys (with the possible exception of Brown) would be sure-fire HOFers in this were football, which tends to reward seismic yet brief achievement (see Namath, Joe). That of course is understandable given the short lifespan of a football player, and why Kurt Warner is going to sail into the HOF in his first few years of eligibility while Cone, Hershiser and Guidry will never sniff election.

As for Buerhle, he'd be a real interesting guy if he stuck around another 10 years b/c he seems like the type who could churn out 15-10, 4.00 ERA seasons well into his 40s. (Freaky--just looked him up and his 162-game average is 15-11, 3.80) But he's talked of retirement already, and while I imagine he signs another deal as a free agent this winter, I don't see him sticking around nearly long enough to test out the whole "300 is automatic" hypothesis. He'll probably win 200 but that won't get him into the conversation.

See, I don't think the Hall should even think about guys who are just decent for a long time. I'd rather see a Hershiser in for his five years of being elite than a guy who puts up numbers only because he was able to be decent for a long time. If a guy is never considered to be elite at any point in his career, he should not be a Hall of Famer.

 

[BYH]

The Buehrle discussion will probably end up being as moot as the rest of this, b/c he's not going to get to 300. But IF he got there, he'd be a Hall of Famer. Or at least he would after Jamie Moyer got in after he won his 300th game at age 57.

 

[BB Bobcat]

This thread has good but ultimately meaningless debate.

You mean like: "Which Hollywood superstar would you rather sleep with?"

We've never had a thread like that.

 

[BrianGriffin]

The Buehrle discussion will probably end up being as moot as the rest of this, b/c he's not going to get to 300. But IF he got there, he'd be a Hall of Famer. Or at least he would after Jamie Moyer got in after he won his 300th game at age 57.

Jamie Moyer was elite. He was the best pitcher in the league for guys who couldn't throw 80.

 

[Mizzougrad96]

Which active and recently retired starters do people think will make it?

Smoltz, Maddux, Clemens, Randy Johnson, Schilling, Glavine, Pedro Martinez, Mussina...

Are any active starters locks? Halladay? Sabathia? Santana?

 

[Dick Whitman]

Which active and recently retired starters do people think will make it?

Smoltz, Maddux, Clemens, Randy Johnson, Schilling, Glavine, Pedro Martinez, Mussina...

Are any active starters locks? Halladay? Sabathia? Santana?

Smoltz
Maddux
Johnson
Schilling
Glavine
Pedro
Mussina

Halladay (Lock)
Sabathia (Almost there)
Verlander (On his way)
Santana (probably needs to come back and put in 3-4 solid years)
Lincecum (On his way)
Greinke (Needs to string together some seasons that match his talent)
Felix (Needs to change teams)

Close but no cigar:
Mark Buehrle
Tim Hudson
Cliff Lee
Roy Oswalt

Should be in but won't be
Kevin Brown
David Cone

 

[dreunc1542]

I don't think Mussina gets in. Lincecum and Felix have a long way to go and with pitchers it's always dangerous to start talking about them early. Santana is a great example of that and he had more great seasons than either of those two at this point. Greinke's not even remotely close to being in this discussion as of now. I agree that Halladay is pretty much a lock, especially with how durable he's proven to be. Verlander and Sabathia would most likely get there if they're durable, but once again, that's not a given.

If Oswalt had 3-4 more good seasons, he'd have a good chance, but I don't see his body holding up for that.

 

[Dick Whitman]

I don't think Mussina gets in. Lincecum and Felix have a long way to go and with pitchers it's always dangerous to start talking about them early. Santana is a great example of that and he had more great seasons than either of those two at this point. Greinke's not even remotely close to being in this discussion as of now. I agree that Halladay is pretty much a lock, especially with how durable he's proven to be. Verlander and Sabathia would most likely get there if they're durable, but once again, that's not a given.

If Oswalt had 3-4 more good seasons, he'd have a good chance, but I don't see his body holding up for that.

I think Mussina will get in pretty easily. I don't think he would have a few years ago. But voters are more with it now.

I was talking Felix, Greinke, and Lincecum on sheer talent. Probably getting a little late for Greinke, though. Good lord, didn't realize he only has 71 wins. It's unfortunate for him that he's in the middle of one of the most inflated ERAs I can recall for a season. His peripherals are unreal this year.

With two Cy Young awards already under his belt, Lincecum just needs to stay healthy for about 8-10 more years. He's like a guy who birdied four of his first five holes on Sunday at a major.

Remember, the question was who do I think will make it. It's easy to say Sabathia and Halladay and stop there. Tougher to project the young 'uns, but interesting to try.

 

[BYH]

Johan Santana? Seriously? He's got less of a case than anyone here, including Buehrle. Santana's trying to come back from a shoulder surgery nobody's ever come all the way back from. His peripherals were falling off a cliff even before that (K/BB ratio dropped five straight years, BB/9 plateaued or climbed five straight years, K/9 plateaued or dropped three straight years). As great as he was at his peak, it wasn't nearly long enough. He's got a far better shot at never throwing 200 IP in a season again and not pitching the last year of his deal than he does of making the HOF.

 

[Mizzougrad96]

Mussina will get in, but he's not a lock. I don't think he should, but he will...

I agree Santana needs a couple more good years. I can't imagine almost any starter getting in with fewer than 200 wins and he's probably 4-5 solid seasons away from that.

Kevin Brown's numbers are better than I remember, (especially the ERA) but I don't see him getting in.

Lincecum could be the next great pitcher of this generation, or he could be the next Saberhagen or Santana, a guy who had a couple spectacular seasons, but couldn't maintain it over the long term.

I agree that of active starters, Halladay is probably the only lock.