Hall or not?

[BunnyHardaway]

Re: Hall or not?

In all seriousness, how is Pedro NOT a lock?

The only thing that anyone could hold against him is that he only has 206 wins at the moment, but he is definitely a lock. His 2000 season was probably one of the best seasons ever put together by a pitcher. Only giving up 128 hits in 217 innings is ridiculous.

[skitch]

Re: Hall or not?

The only thing that anyone could hold against him is that he only has 206 wins at the moment, but he is definitely a lock. His 2000 season was probably one of the best seasons ever put together by a pitcher. Only giving up 128 hits in 217 innings is ridiculous.

At the same time, though, wins and losses are some of the most overrated stats when considering pitchers.

[Brandon13]

Re: Hall or not?

At the same time, though, wins and losses are some of the most overrated stats when considering pitchers.

I'd say they ARE the worst stats when evaluating a pitcher.

[ehh]

Re: Hall or not?

No way Moose is a HOF. I honestly don't think it's debatable. You can argue he was never even a #1 starter throughout his career. IMO, I'll always look at Moose as a very good #2 starter. He was never a dominant ace, even in Baltimore. A very good pitcher but he never wowed you or dominated the competition.

Petey though, he's a lock.

[Stu]

Re: Hall or not?

No way Moose is a HOF. I honestly don't think it's debatable. You can argue he was never even a #1 starter throughout his career. IMO, I'll always look at Moose as a very good #2 starter. He was never a dominant ace, even in Baltimore. A very good pitcher but he never wowed you or dominated the competition.

Petey though, he's a lock.

Agree 100%. People look at wins too much when looking at HOF pitchers. If they let every 250 win pitcher in you're just rewarding longevity. IMO, the HOF should be reserved for the best of the best, even though that always isn't the case.

[ZM Punk]

Re: Hall or not?

Hell no, the only way Mussina will see the HOF is if he drives up to Cooperstown on his own time. The guy has been a very consistently good pitcher, but with the exception of maybe a couple of years he has never been great.

[snepp]

Re: Hall or not?

I didn't put Pedro as a lock for this reason.

If Pedro retired right now, who would have enough faith in that collection of d-bag Hall voters to call him a lock?

These are the same type of guys that give Cy Youngs to Bartolo Colon simply because he won 20 games, and Gold Gloves to guys like Rafael Palmiero when they DH nearly fulltime.

Until Pedro pads his win total a little more, I don't have have nearly enough faith to make him a "lock".

[BunnyHardaway]

Re: Hall or not?

At the same time, though, wins and losses are some of the most overrated stats when considering pitchers.

Unfortunately, thats the stat that's most important to the voters. Bert Blyleven has something like 287 wins and he still can't get in. It's a horrible way to go about it, but I doubt they'll change.

[Misfit]

Re: Hall or not?

Agree 100%. People look at wins too much when looking at HOF pitchers. If they let every 250 win pitcher in you're just rewarding longevity. IMO, the HOF should be reserved for the best of the best, even though that always isn't the case.

Wins meant something when it was unheard of for a starter to not go 7, 8 or 9 innings. In today's game though they're almost irrelevant.


Mussina has always been good enough to be in the discussion of the best pitchers in the league, but has never done enough to separate himself from the rest of the pack. There has always been someone (who usually more than one) who was better year in and year out. He'll have solid numbers when he retires, but they won't be good enough. I'd say he's a definite "No" for the Hall.

[SportsTop]

Re: Hall or not?

I didn't put Pedro as a lock for this reason.

If Pedro retired right now, who would have enough faith in that collection of d-bag Hall voters to call him a lock?

These are the same type of guys that give Cy Youngs to Bartolo Colon simply because he won 20 games, and Gold Gloves to guys like Rafael Palmiero when they DH nearly fulltime.

Until Pedro pads his win total a little more, I don't have have nearly enough faith to make him a "lock".

He's a lock and the BBWAA know he's a lock as well. His win total has nothing to do with it. The man is the leader in career ERA+, the single season (modern day) ERA+ record, has three Cy Youngs, and he had about a seven year stretch of dominance that is nearly unmatched (the writers take that into account more than anything).

Pedro, Maddux, Clemens, Johnson, and Glavine are all locks for the HOF.

[CMH]

Re: Hall or not?

The only reason why I think Mussina has a chance is because 1) The Hall doesn't realize that Wins are overrated. and 2) The guys that are locks: Pedro, Maddux, Johnson, Clemens, and Glavine will be in the Hall by the time Mussina is facing off against the many over 4.00 ERA pitchers retiring in the next few years.

The competition isn't too stiff after the above names. Mussina is better than David Wells, Jamie Moyer, and Woody Williams.

I'm not saying that should guarentee an induction for him but it might help him.

I do agree that Blyleven needs to be inducted first before Moose. No way Moose should be in there before the best pitcher not in the Hall.

[SPTO]

Re: Hall or not?

I do agree that Blyleven needs to be inducted first before Moose. No way Moose should be in there before the best pitcher not in the Hall.

How bout Jack Morris? I still contend that if he was nicer to the media folks during his glory years that he'd be in the Hall right now. Sure he has a very high career ERA but the man has some credentials that very few pitchers these days can claim to have.

[MassNole]

Re: Hall or not?

Mike Mussina:

6 AS appearances, 6 Gold Gloves, 243 career wins, 2626 Ks, 3.67 ERA, 1.18 WHIP

BUT

No 20 win seasons, no CY award, and no WS ring.

I myself put no stock into a championship or not, but it seems some voters do. So a WS ring can make or break a fringe HOF guy and in this case it may break him.

SO Hall or not?

It is the Baseball Hall of Fame, not the Baseball Hall of Good. As such, Mussina should never be in the HOF unless he does so as an announcer or manager.

[CMH]

Re: Hall or not?

How bout Jack Morris? I still contend that if he was nicer to the media folks during his glory years that he'd be in the Hall right now. Sure he has a very high career ERA but the man has some credentials that very few pitchers these days can claim to have.

I'll say this.

Blyleven is first no matter what. He should be there before Pedro and Johnson.

Morris would be a nice pitcher to have but I think he's in the Schilling/Mussina area. It also doesn't help that he now has to worry about this huge glut of great pitchers getting in in the next decade.

That being said, I'm inclined to think that Morris should be in before Schilling or Mussina. However, if Morris got in then I'd suggest that both Schilling and Mussina (assuming they each have close to 275 wins) should also be in.

I know there is this huge deal about a Hall of Good. But, how many pitchers in baseball are really great enough to make the Hall?

As I said before, after Clemens, Glavine, and Maddux we have Johnson, Smoltz, and Pedro. After that it's Mussina and Schilling.

Who else could even arguably get votes at this point? There aren't that many great pitchers with the numbers and consistency left. Not even Johan Santana (Two Cy Youngs) is HOF material just yet. Barry Zito is scaring fans. Mulder and Hudson have fallen off. Schmidt hasn't been the same pitcher over the past few years. Andy Pettitte could be a favorite with his rings but he still needs a lot more wins to be in there.

Most of the guys we consider great are far too young to know what's going to happen in 10 years.

Mussina has been consistently good throughout his career. Yes, he wasn't the best ever during his time but how many were with Clemens, Johnson, and Pedro in his league? Do you really believe that only three pitchers could be the best during a decade in their respective leagues?

Without looking at the list of Hall names I'd wager that more than three pitchers in the AL from every decade are in the Hall.

[sbmnky]

Re: Hall or not?

I'm not talking about overall wins. I'm talking about at least having a couple 20 win seasons and maybe a Cy Young award. If you don't have that in your career you shouldn't be in the Hall.

It's hard to base the decision solely on wins, because it doesn't take into account the type of run support. I think his ERA is a better indication of success. I'd like to know his average innings per start stat too combined with average number of pitches w/ ball/strike ratio. I think those would give you a good indication of the type of pitcher he is.

All-Star appearances and championships, imo, are irrelevant in HoF discussions. All-Stars selections, as we all know, could use major tweaking and championship are team awards, not personal. I would consider personal awards (MVP, CY Young, Silver Slugger, etc) more relevant award.

With all that said, I think he's a bubble guy. If I had to vote right now, I would say no.