Case for the HOF: John Franco

Collapse

Recommended Videos

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • dieselboy
    --------------
    • Dec 2002
    • 18040

    #31
    Re: Case for the HOF: John Franco

    Originally posted by Squint
    Seeing as how there was no such thing as a "closer" in the beginning of his career, then I find it hard to classify him as one. Just as I would find it hard to classify Mike Marshall as a "closer".
    I understand what you are saying, 100%.

    But I still think you could define Sutter as a career closer. As for Marshall, he started a few games here and there throughout his career, so its easy to disclude him as a "closer".

    Comment

    • nyisles16
      All Star
      • Apr 2003
      • 8317

      #32
      Re: Case for the HOF: John Franco

      Franco is just not good enough to make it.. they still need to let some other big name closers in the hall before even thinking of him.. & if longevity means anything, then I say let Jessie Orosco in too... yes he was a good closer for several years.. but a great one? the games stat to me is not a criteria for a pitcher - you could be brought in every day, either for one batter, one pitch, a inning, so forth & so on..

      Sutter should be in not only for being an elite closer, but he also developed a pitch that is now in use in baseball..

      Comment

      Working...