Archive for the ‘Mike Mussina’ tag
The Mike Mussina Hall Of Fame Case — Part 7
Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
Part 5
Part 6
Mark makes his final argument.
Mark
Stop. Just stop. One of Glavine’s Cy Young awards “doesn’t count?” His World Series ring “doesn’t count?” It’s “not Mussina’s fault” that he doesn’t have a WS ring? Seriously? When did you turn into Jay Marriotti? And I hate to break this to you, but having to face the guy batting .230 at the bottom of the AL order is not harder than having to actually get out on the field and take an at bat 3 times a game. The “harder league” of slow pitch softball is a myth.
You’ve done nothing, absolutely nothing to lay out a case that Mussina is a Hall of Famer. At this point you’re trying to strengthen his candidacy by tearing down the candidacy of someone who is actually deserving. Induction into the Hall of Fame isn’t a right that comes with having played in the bigs. The argument is not why a guy should be excluded. It is why he should be included. And it’s just not there for Mussina. And 5 years from now, no one is going to make a big stink when he doesn’t get in, because he just wasn’t a strong HoF candidate in the first place.
Rob
We’ve done nothing to make a case for it, but you haven’t exactly made a good case against, which means he doesn’t get in, nobody would be upset. If he does, nobody should be upset either.
Can we now end the debate? For somebody that doesn’t deserve the hall, he sparked quite a debate.
Mark
Rob, my main point from the beginning is that there doesn’t need to be a strong case against. There needs to be a strong case for.
That will be my last word. I yield the floor and the balance of my time.
Tom
@Mark: One of Glavine’s Cy Young awards “doesn’t count?”
Yes — a subjective award given out by idiots who overvalue “Wins” is occasionally given to the wrong guy. The best pitcher in the league always wins the Cy Young? Really? If you believe this, then that’s why this argument is going nowhere. Look at the 2007 voting and tell me Barry Zito deserved the award over Pedro Martinez. Stop it.
@Mark: His World Series ring “doesn’t count?” It’s “not Mussina’s fault” that he doesn’t have a WS ring? Seriously? When did you turn into Jay Marriotti?
Because all a starting pitcher can do in the World Series is win his two starts. That’s it. Which he did. Unless you have an idea that “elite” pitchers have the ability to stare really hard at their teammate’s bats and magically imbue them with home run power. Maybe Mussina should have closed game seven in 2003, too? Or batted so the Yankees had more runs? Or maybe used his apparently underdeveloped elite pitcher telekinetic powers to guide Rivera’s throw to the second baseman?
@Mark: And I hate to break this to you, but having to face the guy batting .230 at the bottom of the AL order is not harder than having to actually get out on the field and take an at bat 3 times a game.
Stop it. Batting 3 times a game has less than nothing to do with pitching ability. And besides the point. Crush the DH all you want, and it’s fair to do so, but it makes the AL the harder league to pitch in. That’s why we have “adjusted” ERA.
Last Year —
AVG/OBP/SLG of an AL 9-hitter: .254/.311/.367
AVG/OBP/SLG of an NL 9-hitter: .184/.244/.252
@Mark: You’ve done nothing, absolutely nothing to lay out a case that Mussina is a Hall of Famer.
And yes, I have. You’ve chosen to ignore everything and say “I’m right because I’m right.” He is a better pitcher than Tom Glavine and the same pitcher as Juan Marichal. The strong case for is Hulse’s e-mail. Which you’ve totally ignored.
So, sure, we’ll pick this back up in 8 years or so when I can gloat.
—-
That was the end. I took the last word. And I took being right.
One final thought: there is no realistic argument that keeps Mike Mussina out of the Hall of Fame. Somewhere in the last five or ten years, 300 Wins evolved from “automatic ticket to Cooperstown” to “required for a ticket to Cooperstown”. That’s insane. If anything, this series of posts should have shown people that it’s possible for a person to be a moderately worse pitcher (Glavine) yet be more deserving of a Hall of Fame honor then a better pitcher who had less wins.
In fact, to further outline how stupid this is, let’s look at Glavine again for just a minute. Glavine finished his career at 305-203 with 3.54 ERA. Guaranteed Hall of Fame, right?
If we remove Glavine’s four WORST seasons, his career line goes to 285-164 with 3.38 ERA. Now it’s suddenly not so clear. By removing Glavine’s worst seasons from the equation, we somehow made his Hall of Fame candidacy shakier. This is the argument people are going to make over the next couple of seasons as to why Mussina’s numbers don’t merit a Hall of Fame induction. It was more valuable to stick around and get beat up as an old man then to retire off a 20 win season with a very solid record intact. Not only doesn’t not make sense — it borders on lunacy.
Mussina is a (likely) clean guy who had the unfortunate distinction of pitching in the same league at the same time as, not one, not two, but THREE (and the same division as two) of the most dominant pitchers of the 90s and 00s in Randy Johnson, Pedro Martinez, and Roger Clemens. People will argue that his lack of this subjective award is a black mark, but that actually having one of these awards, itself, doesn’t matter. People will argue that his lack of a World Series win is a black mark, while ignoring that fact that, if Mariano Rivera does his job in the 2001 World Series, the Yankees beat the Diamondbacks, Mussina has his ring, and the terrorists don’t win by belittling 9/11.
Should Mussina’s name never come up on any lists, he’s unquestionably a Hall of Fame pitcher. The only question is how many years the voters make him wait — as his stats will clearly be more deserving seven years after retirement instead of five.
The Mike Mussina Hall Of Fame Case — Part 6
Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
Part 5
Rob
@Chuck: THESE ARE THE YANKEES ANNOUNCERS!!!!
All the more reason to discard and piss on their opinion. If they’re anything like you, they’re bitter about Mussina not getting a ring with the Yanks.
Mussina will be in the Hall of Fame. Book it.
This next e-mail includes two things we’ve all been waiting for. First, the last gasp of the soundly defeated: sarcasm! And second, the first appearance of the “Hall of Very Good”.
Mark
Steve Coogan and Mike Hulse have convinced me. When he retires, Mike Mussina should be a 3rd ballot inductee into the “Mike Mussina Memorial Guys Who Aren’t Quite As Good As Hall Of Famers But We Feel Like They’re Good Enough Hall Of Pretty Good.”
Which I, of course, had to mention. I also had to mention, again, the single knock anyone’s been able to come up with.
Tom
I’d like to congratulate Mark for finally breaking out the “Hall of Very Good” line.
And you’re still wrong. He is as good, if not better, than guys currently in the Hall and has been 120 games over .500 in the steroid era. The knock you’ve come up with is “he hasn’t been as good as some of the greatest pitchers who’ve ever played.”
Mark
I’m not wrong. In fact, your last assertion is wrong. I keep saying that no one has presented an argument as to why he shouldn’t be in. The only real argument laid out as to why he should be in was Hulse’s “He’s not quite as good as Marichal, but he’s similar enough” argument. And by the way:
@Tom: “he hasn’t been as good as some of the greatest pitchers who’ve ever played.”
We are talking about the Hall of Fame here, which is supposed to enshrine the greatest players ever to play the game. So if he hasn’t been as good as the greatest pitchers ever to play, no, he shouldn’t be in the Hall.
Chad
@Mark: So if he hasn’t been as good as the greatest pitchers ever to play, no, he shouldnt be in the Hall.
By that rule, wouldn’t there only be one player from each position?
In my next response, I present what I feel is the best argument for Mussina’s candidacy. It should defeat any person who wants to argue that Mussina should be out. It will get fleshed out as we continue.
Tom
Yes, in Mark’s Hall of Fame there would be like 12 guys… and every new guy would supplant one of the older guys.
@Mark: We are talking about the Hall of Fame here, which is supposed to enshrine the greatest players ever to play the game.
So why do they put in any center fielder not named Willie Mays? Because it’s not for only the best guy at every position to ever play. Here is a much better test: Tom Glavine. Mussina is a much better pitcher than Glavine in nearly every measurable way. Glavine also fell short in the postseason quite often for reasons that had nothing to do with him.
Mark
So let me see if I have a few things straight:
It is not a reasonable standard to expect that a player who is enshrined as one of the greatest players of all time actually be one of the greatest players of all time.
A Mets fan is bashing Tom Glavine. Perhaps we can also get Coogan to bash Aaron Boone, or maybe Charlie to bash Dan Marino.
@Tom: Mussina is a much better pitcher than Glavine in nearly every measurable way.
Apparently Glavine having more wins, a longer career, a lower career ERA, 2 Cy Young awards and 4 top 3 finishes, more playoff wins and a World Series Ring is absolutely meaningless. Thanks for clarifying.
That sound about right? Should we even get into the fact that Glavine, unlike Mussina, was actually responsible for picking up a bat 3 times a game and having to play real baseball for 22 years? Or maybe we should make the argument that Maddux, Glavine and Smoltz in the 90′s weren’t the decade’s most dominant rotation. While we’re at it, using what I’ve learned here, maybe I’ll make the argument that when he retires we should induct Augie Ojeda into the Hall.
Tom
@Mark: A Mets fan is bashing Tom Glavine. Perhaps we can also get Coogan to bash Aaron Boone, or maybe Charlie to bash Dan Marino.
Irrelevant. Maddux, Chipper, and Smoltz are all HOFers and I have no problem admitting that. And, again, I’m not even saying that Glavine won’t or shouldn’t make the Hall of Fame — but Mussina is a better pitcher in every measurable way.
@Mark: Apparently Glavine having more wins, a longer career, a lower career ERA, 2 Cy Young awards and 4 top 3 finishes, more playoff wins and a World Series Ring is absolutely meaningless. Thanks for clarifying.
His 1998 Cy Young win is a joke. Maddux led the league in everything that year except wins and should have won. So we’re down to signing up everyone with one Cy Young. Eric Gagne and Barry Zito are gonna be pumped!
As for his 14 postseason wins — if you’re going to mention them, you should probably mention his 16 losses. This clearly means he doesn’t “bring it” when the chips are down or some other such nonsense. Mussina and Glavine have exactly the same postseason win percentage. .467. Both suffered from a lack of run support and a bad bullpen in the postseason. They also share the exact same ERA. Again — Irrelevant.
World Series Ring. Are we just counting Game 6 of the 95 series on his resume? Are we ignoring the 2002 NLDS when the Giants torched him twice? Are we putting him in just for the Game Six stand? I’m not sure because we only count Mussina’s bad starts and none of his good ones. Just like the World Series ring he’d have if Mariano Rivera throws the ball to second base without an error?
Longer career: Glavine’s average of 8 extra wins over 4 more years puts him over the top? Really?
NL vs. AL: Thanks for helping my argument as Mussina did all this in the harder league for pitchers. The absolute only difference between these two guys is an imaginary number (300) that makes a pitcher “elite”. Mussina walked less guys per 9 IP, struck out more guys per 9 IP, had a better adjusted ERA in the harder league, had a better WHIP in the harder league, gave up less hits per 9 IP, had a better winning percentage, had more strikeouts in less seasons, and HALF the walks. Apparently Tom Glavine’s ability sacrifice bunt like a champ is more important than Mussina’s ability to field his position.
In the seventh and final part: Mark and I will make our last ditch argument, Rob will call for peace, and a final thought or two.
The Mike Mussina Hall Of Fame Case – Part 5
It’s been a while but I want to get these last few parts of this out before I forgot… or before I went to Germany at which point I’d start writing about Germany.
When we last left, Mark pointed out that Hulse and I had been spending so much time making the case that there was no good reason to keep Mussina out that no one had actually been making the case on why he should actually be in. To wit:
Hulse, thanks for making my final point, which was that we’re arguing why he shouldn’t be in instead of why he should be in. What’s the argument for Mussina to be in? Anything? Anything at all? You spent 4 paragraphs talking yourself into why he’s a better pitcher than David Wells or Chien Ming Wang. I’m sorry, but for a Hall of Famer, that argument doesn’t even need to be made.
He made a good point. So Hulse and I responded.
Tom
@Mark: If you’re going to compare one player to another in support of Hall candidacy, make the case why the other guy is comparable to an HOFer (or why he should be an HOFer) and then talk about why player 2 is equivalent or better.
Fair enough: Let’s take the stats of three Hall of Fame pitchers without 300 wins and look at their statistics.
Juan Marichal. 240 wins. 100 games over .500. 1.1 WHIP. 123 ERA+. In the hall.
Jim Bunning. 224 wins. 40 games over .500. 1.1 WHIP. 114 ERA+. In the hall. Veteran’s committee.
Jim Palmer. 268 wins. 120 games over .500. 1.1 WHIP. 126 ERA+. In the Hall
Mike Mussina. 270 wins. 120 games over .500. 1.1 WHIP. 123 ERA+.
So, Remind me again how he’s not better than guys already in the Hall? If you insist on using things like wins, remind me how he isn’t exactly Jim Palmer?
People have been conditioned to 300 or bust in the last decade. It’s stupid.
Mike
I’ve spent this whole time refuting claims against Moose because the claims being made are either insane or not really looked up, just kind of ambled out there based on anecdotal thoughts like ‘he never pitched big in big games’ which are untrue. I brought up Pettitte and Wang, et al, because you did first with this grand claim that in order to go to the Hall of Fame you have to be the best pitcher in your own rotation every year no matter what.
The Case FOR Moose is that from 1992-2001, he was easily one of the 10 best pitchers in baseball every single year without a doubt. He has 270 career wins in an era where bullpens have poached wins from starters, making 300 wins way harder than it was. For more in depth comparison, I turn to Joe Posnanski from SI.com.
Joe Posnanski from SI.com
Pitcher A: 243-142, .631 winning percentage, 3,507 innings, 3,153 hits, 2,303 Ks, 709 walks, 263 Win Shares, 123 ERA+.
Pitcher B: 270-153, .638 winning percentage, 3,562 innings, 3,450 hits, 2,813 Ks, 785 walks, 270 Win Shares, 123 ERA+.
That’s pretty comparable, no? Pitcher A gave up fewer hits and walks, but pitcher B won more games at a higher clip and struck out more batters. They have the same ERA+.
If this is all you had to vote for the Hall of Fame, you would probably have a hard time deciding. Of course you wouldn’t vote for the Hall of Fame based solely on those numbers … you would want to dig a little deeper. So, OK, here are the Top 7 ERA+ seasons for each pitcher:
Pitcher A
169 ERA+
168 ERA+
167 ERA+
144 ERA+
132 ERA+
123 ERA+
121 ERA+
Pitcher B
163 ERA+
157 ERA+
145 ERA+
142 ERA+
137 ERA+
132 ERA+
129 ERA+ (twice)
There’s much more, and many more numbers, in Posnanski’s two-page column. I recommend reading it in its entirety. Spoiler Alert: Pitcher A is Marichal. Pitcher B is Mussina.
Coogan
I’m not even sure comparing him to other HOFers entirely solves any argument either. He has more wins than Koufax, but that’s because Koufax retired when he was 24. Of course, Mussina has more wins …
Even better, what about comparing him to other pitchers of his era? Was there ever a time anyone would ever consider Mussina one of the Top 5-7 (being fairly generous with the number) starting pitchers in the league for any prolonged period of time? If not, then why would he be a HOFer? Simply because he pitched long enough to be in the Top 10 in BB’s/9 and K’s/9 in 10 or more seasons?
That sounds a bit like arguing for a “compiler.” I mean, if inducting a guy for reaching a certain career milestone is dumb (300/3,000), then doing it because he pitched a lot of innings in a bunch of consecutive seasons doesn’t jive with me either.
I’m not really passionate about it either way but I never thought I was looking at a HOFer when I saw him the same way as when I look at Pedro, Johnson, Maddux or to a lesser degree, Schilling. If he gets in, good for him. I won’t boycott the HOF or baseball or anything …
Tom
To me, a compiler is a guy who stays playing after he’s useful to the detriment of the team that signs him. I don’t think you can say that about a guy who won 20 games his last season.
Like, Jamie Moyer is still useful to the Phillies. I don’t think he’s a compiler.
But, like a phoenix rising from the ashes, Chuck returns with one more point for the insane Yankee portion of our program.
Chuck
Okay I have the point that ends this argument in my favor. On the Friday Yanks telecast Al Leiter and Ken Singleton started talking about about Moose as a Hall of Famer because he was at Old Timer’s Day.
They said on air, “close but he will fall short and I’d have to say no especially with Blylevin not getting the call yet.”
THESE ARE THE YANKEES ANNOUNCERS!!!! Moose is not even close, plus Jesse Barfield almost took him out in the Old Timers game.
We’re coming down to the end here. Either one long or two short parts remaining. Still to come — the “against” crowd resorts to sarcasm, my anti-Glavine opinion is reduced down to “he’s a Brave and you’re a Met fan,” and more!
The Mike Mussina Hall Of Fame Case – Part 4
In part three, Chuck presented with an ace in the hole. The unanswerable question.
Chuck
Name one other HOF caliber pitcher you think Moose would beat heads up in a big game. Maybe we could discuss Glavine or Phil Neikro.
Unfortunately, as a reasonable human being, I had to respond to both this and his previous e-mail.
Tom
@Chuck: 0 Rings even though he went to the playoffs in 9 seasons – don’t tell me this doesn’t matter when he went to the playoffs in 9 seasons won 0 WS and only got to two when the teams he pitched for were often the favorites coming into the series
It does not matter. Not a lick. Not even a little bit. A starting pitcher pitches 7 or 8 innings of 2 games. If you want to just ignore the stuff I sent about how he was a pretty awesome post-season pitcher, that’s your prerogative. He doesn’t have “a ring” because Mariano didn’t do his job in 2001. Rings are a stupid metric which only exist in the Yankees world of “our above average shortstop has 4 of them.”
@Chuck: – Plus how can you be a Hall of Famer if the teams you played for won’t even retire your jersey and frankly wouldn’t even think about it
I’m going to go ahead and bet the Dbacks, Phillies, and Red Sox are not going to retire Schilling’s jersey. I’m going to bet that Smoltz and Glavine won’t have their numbers retired by Atlanta. This is also a stupid requirement.
@Chuck:- Teams Moose played for had a 7-9 Post Season Series record.
If Mo and Wang do their jobs, he’s 9-7. Still not meaningful.
@Chuck: Name one other HOF caliber pitcher you think Moose would beat heads up in a big game. Maybe we could discuss Glavine or Phil Neikro.
Randy Johnson — because he did it twice in the 1997 ALDS. Does that count, though, since it wasn’t in the one good post-season game he ever pitched in 2001?
Also — I invite any of those in the “against” camp to answer Pete’s question. “Had he returned this season and next season, won 15 games in both seasons, but was not better than Sabatha or Burnett, but had 300 wins, would he be a Hall of Famer?” Because if the answer’s yes then he is in right now.
Chuck, in his patented way, chose to ignore most of the e-mail.
Chuck
No brainer. Johnson over Moose. Did you watch the 2001 WS or the 2005 ALDS? Actually as a Mets fan you probably didn’t?
Chuck has a very odd way of using “you’re a Mets” fan to make a point. Even when I’m arguing in favor of a Yankee. I don’t quite understand this, but it seems to be some kind of Yankee defense mechanism.
Tom
2001 WS — the one where he had a bad game 1 and a game six where he gave you 8 innings of 2 run, 10K baseball while your offense couldn’t scratch out a run against career 4.50 ERA Miguel Batista? Yep, saw it. Clearly Sterling Hitchcock was deserving of the win in that game.
2005 ALDS — Game 5, I guess? So Game 1 where he gave you six innings of no run ball and the win doesn’t count? Or do we not count that game? I guess game 5 is worse than Randy Johnson having you out of game 3 by the third Inning or Wang’s 4 runs in 7 innings in game 2 count less?
I guess bad post-season starts are grounds for dismissal? G-bye Glavine, Smoltz, Maddux, Pedro, every pitcher ever.
Mike
You mean the 2001 WS where Moose had his ring all locked up until Mariano Rivera BLEW THE EFFING WORLD SERIES?!? The World Series that Moose had no hand in losing? The World Series where your golden boy Andy Pettitte put forth a game 6 effort, where the series could have been won, by getting dismantled in a 20-1 drubbing? Don’t drop ‘as a Mets fan you probably didn’t’ on anyone either. Bottom line every argument about him doesn’t factor in anything he did in Baltimore, when he was clearly in his prime. What he got paid is absolutely meaningless. I can throw out a list of guys who haven’t lived up to a contract, including Randy Johnson who got a huge extension to be a Yankee, promptly becoming mediocre.
I also love how you just restated the same argument from before that wasn’t good then, and it didn’t get any better.
Also wonderful how Tom threw out the 1997 ALDS where Moose torched RJ, but you’ll still take Johnson any day of the week. Apparently you’re not into actual reading. All you can consider is what you saw in his Yankee years because that’s what you watched, and that alone means he doesn’t go. If Mo Rivera did his job in 2001, and the Yankees brought him back this year, where he’d undoubtedly add 15 wins, you’d be trumpeting him as a candidate right now. If they’d managed to not tank the 2003 WS with a 1 hit effort in game 6 against Josh Beckett, Moose probably would’ve won the MVP of that series because he SAVED YOUR HIDE.
Every argument against him going is refuted by any measurable numbers besides rings and Cy Youngs. Every list of records he’s on puts him in very rare company. He was a better pitcher before he became a Yankee, which is probably why jackass Yankee fan du jour thinks he can’t possibly be in the Hall.
Bottom line…here’s some things to chew on, courtesy of baseball-reference.com
Similar Pitchers
1. Juan Marichal (866) *
2. David Wells (863)
3. Curt Schilling (860)
4. Jim Palmer (855) *
5. Carl Hubbell (855) *
6. Kevin Brown (844)
7. Jack Morris (838)
8. Clark Griffith (831) *
9. Jim Bunning (826) *
10. Andy Pettitte (824)
Marichal, Palmer, Hubbell, and Bunning are in the Hall. Schillings going to be in, and by all accounts Jack Morris should have been in years ago.
He’s going to get in. You can revile him because he dared be on teams that didn’t win rings due to people he had nothing to do with and isn’t a ‘Real Yankee’ like effing Luis Sojo or something. He wasn’t better in his rotation than a pair of known cheaters in Clemens and Pettitte. He wasn’t good enough to make sure that everyone else in Baltimore came though with offense, or good enough to make sure that the Jeffrey Maier call was correct. How dare he only pitch a career ERA under 4 with 270 wins and a career winning percentage of .638 which would have been higher if he played on better teams or got some better luck with the offense given him on a nightly basis. As far as taking him against a ‘big game’ pitcher of the era, the only guys I wouldn’t take him over are Schilling and Pedro in his prime. That’s it. I will take him against anyone else you can name.
Chuck
Okay I refuse to discuss this anymore. This will never happen. If Moose wants to go to the Hall he should buy a ticket and hop on a bus to Cooperstown. Not worth the hour of my life I’ve lost discussing this.
With Chuck successfully defeated by logic, reason, and having an indefensible position — only one dragon was left to be slain.
Mark
@Hulse: again, nothing in this argument says he shouldn’t be in the hall.
Hulse, thanks for making my final point, which was that we’re arguing why he shouldn’t be in instead of why he should be in. What’s the argument for Mussina to be in? Anything? Anything at all? You spent 4 paragraphs talking yourself into why he’s a better pitcher than David Wells or Chien Ming Wang. I’m sorry, but for a Hall of Famer, that argument doesn’t even need to be made. You’re talking about Andy Pettite and getting lucky with run support as a reason why Mussina was a better pitcher. That’s not an argument for being in the hall. If you’re going to compare one player to another in support of Hall candidacy, make the case why the other guy is comparable to an HOFer (or why he should be an HOFer) and then talk about why player 2 is equivalent or better. Otherwise, you’re just saying player X belongs because he’s better than player Y. Well in that case, Willy Mo Pena is an HOFer because he was better than Wil Cordero. Book it.
And Pete, if he sticks around and gets to 300, does that get him in? Dunno. Maybe. Is 300 wins as meaningful now that remaining a starting pitcher until you’re 40 as impressive? Maybe. Guys get less starts than they used to, but they play longer and they have more reliable closers to save games. So maybe it evens out. But it doesn’t matter, because he didn’t get to 300 wins, so there’s no real need to consider it.
Next, we try to take on Mark’s argument.
The Mike Mussina Hall Of Fame Case – Part 3
Mike
So Don Drysdale should be removed immediately since he was never better than Koufax? I guess Glavine and Smoltz can also forget it since they were never the best pitcher on a staff with one of the 10 best pitchers of all time? We can also keep Schilling out since he pitched behind all-time greats Randy Johnson and Pedro Martinez. I also wasn’t aware only his years in New York can be considered and that to make the hall you had to be a Dominant pitcher well into your late 30′s.
@Mark: In 2001 he was just behind Clemens as the best pitcher on the Yanks.
He was 17-11 with a 3.15 ERA. Clemens was 20-3 with a 3.51 ERA. Clemens was also amped up on steroids. Basically, Clemens got lucky with some No decisions in games he could have lost and Moose didn’t. If Clemens was in fact better, it isn’t by much, and you could easily argue he wasn’t better, just luckier.
@Mark: In 2002 he was just behind David Wells (higher ERA, 3 more losses, 1 less win) for the best pitcher on the Yanks.
Wells had a worse WHIP and Moose had a higher BABIP, which means, again, he was less lucky and better at not letting runners on base. 18-10 for Moose vs. 19-7 for Wells is absolutely inconsequential, that’s a dead heat. I’d also argue Moose was considered the #2 pitcher and therefore had to face stiffer competition than Wells most times out. Plus, David Wells was a really good pitcher for stretches, just inconsistent, probably due to his being 732 lbs. Moose also had a better k/bb ratio due to him having 182 k’s to Wells’ 137. Moose was better he just happened to have one less win and 3 more losses.
@Mark: In 2003, he was on par with Andy Pettite (lower ERA, fewer wins) for the best pitcher on the Yanks.
21-8 for Pettitte, 17-8 for Moose. Moose is better in basically every single category — better ERA, WHIP, K’s, OPS against, gave up less hits, walked less guys, a better K/BB, less total bases, less runs allowed. Other than Wins, which is a stat that’s based more on the team around a pitcher than the pitcher himself, Moose was clearly a better pitcher. 4 times in the season Pettitte got lucky to get runs, Moose didn’t. Moose was better.
@Mark: In 2004, Jon Leiber had a lower ERA and more wins. Pettite was on par with Vasquez for 2nd best.
Before I even look at numbers, I’m going to say Jon Lieber has never been a very good pitcher. If he does have better numbers, it’s about as massive a fluke as Bret Boone hitting 38 bombs and driving in 130 runs. He’d also been a full time starter since 1992 by this point, so maybe after 12 years he lost a step. That makes him a human being. Moose had his worst statistical year ever in 2004. Lieber had one of his best. Even still… Moose was 12-9 (vs 14-8), ERA was 4.59 (vs. 4.33), he only pitched 164.2 innings which was awfully low, they both had a 1.32 WHIP. If you’re gonna say that a bad 2004 for a pitcher who was 36 years old is grounds for dismissal, apparently nobody is allowed to get old and nobody gets in, ever.
I’ll allow the next 3 years he was simply declining because he was a pitcher in his late 30′s…of course, there was 2008, in your own words…
“In 2008, he was clearly the best pitcher on the team, winning 20 and having the best ERA.”
So, basically, he was as good as anyone he pitched with from 2001-2003, which says nothing to the fact that he was as good as almost anyone in baseball from 1995-2000 in his actual prime. Again, nothing in this argument says he shouldn’t be in the hall.
Chuck Returns!
Chuck
Moose is not a Hall of Famer. Period. End of story. As a matter of fact I can’t believe we’re even discussing this one. This is a joke right? Please tell me it is. ABSOLUTLELY LAUGHABLE and I’m a Yanks fan!
Some more stats for you even though Mark made my point below by the fact the he was almost always the two or three starter on the staff behind, Clemens, Johnson, Wells and even Pettitte or Wang. Can you say that about any other HOF caliber starter?
Fact is HE COULD NOT BE THE MAN and he was paid to be the Man.
- 0 Cy Youngs – In fact he was only better than 4th in the voting ONE TIME
- 0 Rings even though he went to the playoffs in 9 seasons – don’t tell me this doesn’t matter when he went to the playoffs in 9 seasons won 0 WS and only got to two when the teams he pitched for were often the favorites coming into the series
- Teams Moose played for had a 7-9 Post Season Series record.
- In series where Moose started at least two post season games his team was 2-5
- Moose had a 7 wins in 16 career post season series. Yes he didn’t lose all the time, but he didn’t win.
- Moose was only an All Star five times…FIVE!!!!! That’s it in 18 seasons!!!!!
- Plus how can you be a Hall of Famer if the teams you played for won’t even retire your jersey and frankly wouldn’t even think about it
In comparison Curt Schilling won 60 fewer regular season games, he won Cy Youngs and I’d put him in because he was 11-2 in the post season and won three rings. Plus teams he pitched for in the post season won 10 of 12 postseason playoff series and the teams he pitched for were often the underdogs. I hate Schilling, but he is the perfect example of what Moose could have been. More stats for you. In series where Schilling pitched two or more games his team was 5 and 1 and in all those series he had an ERA over 3.52 only twice!!!!!!!! Mussina was under 3.52 in only three of his post season series’.
I could make the same argument for Pedro over Moose and dont compare Maddux, Glavine and Smotlz to him because they all have rings, Cy Youngs and were 300 game winners.
Pete
I guess we cannot induct Ricky Henderson this year. Nobody has retired his number.
Chuck
Pete the A’s will
All this talk of rings was getting to be too much.
Rob
Just want to address one thing… a ring for a pitcher depends on too many factors to hold that against him. First, his teammates need to score runs. He can pitch a no hitter for 10 innings and if his team doesn’t score he leaves the game with a ND. Second, the other pitchers need to step up as well. You get maybe 2 chances in a series to pitch, 3 if it goes 7. I don’t think a ring is as important for pitchers to make the hall as it is for position players that play every day and have a bigger impact on every game.
Chuck finally throws down the gauntlet. Playing what he believes to be his ace in the hole.
Chuck
Name one other HOF caliber pitcher you think Moose would beat heads up in a big game. Maybe we could discuss Glavine or Phil Neikro.
In Part Four, I’ll answer Chuck’s ace in the hole. I bet you come up with the same answer.
The Mike Mussina Hall Of Fame Case – Part 2
Last time on The Mike Mussina Hall Of Fame Case
Chuck
Ok, I’ll play this installment of why Mike Mussina is not a Hall of Famer:
- 0 rings.
- Carried a staff 2 times 1996 and 1997.
- 0 Cy Youngs.
- Limited All-Star appearances.
- Rarely even the third best guy on the staff.
- One good post season start in the ALDS vs the A’s in 2001. He even sucked as an Oriole against the Yanks.
- Pitched well in relief against the Red Sox in 2003. But wasn’t even the best pitcher in the game — Rivera was.
- Played for teams with almost a 600 winning percentage and won 20 games once last season.
- Nibbled all the time.
- Was slow to the plate.
- Never took responsibility for letting the team down.
- Retired not because he didn’t want to play anymore or he couldn’t but rather because he wasn’t getting paid.
- Bolted the Os for more money.
- Held the Yanks hostage after the 2006 season.
I couldn’t take it anymore. A Yankee fan calling “jumping a team for more money” a Hall Of Fame knock? Rings? One good postseason? Specific points of response noted Twitter-style.
Tom
@Coogan: Is it me or is he not as good as Bert Blyleven was? And BB isn’t in…
Blyleven was 30 games over .500, not 120.
@Chuck: – 0 rings
Championships are an overrated measurement of a single player’s ability, or are you not putting Mike Piazza in either?
@Chuck: – Bolted the Os for more money.
If guys didn’t do this, they Yankees’ business model would fall apart.
@Chuck: – 1 good post season start in the ALDS vs the A’s in 2001. He even sucked as an O against the Yanks.
This is very wrong. Like inexplicably wrong. Actually it almost hurts it’s so wrong.
1997 vs. the Indians: ALCS, Game 3 – 7IP, 3H, 1R, 2BB, 15(!)K, ND, Game 6 (3 days rest), 8IP, 1H, 1R, 2BB, 10K, ND.
2003 vs. the Marlins: WS, Game 3 – 7IP, 7H, 1R, 1BB, 9K, W
2004 vs. the Twins: ALDS, Game 1 – 7IP, 7H, 2R, 1BB, 7K, L — they Yankees’ OFFENSE got destroyed by Johan and Nathan.
2004 vs. the Red Sox: ALCS, Game 1 – 6.2IP, 4H, 4R, 0BB, 8K – W, Game 6 – 6IP, 6H, 2R, 2BB, 7K, ND — Blown save by Mo
A 3.42 post season ERA over 21 starts and 2 bullpen appearances is really, really good.
@Chuck: – Nibbled all the time – was slow to the plate
Greg Maddux. Tom Glavine.
@Chuck: – Held the Yanks hostage after the 2006 season
There are arguments that he doesn’t belong. “Chuck Doesn’t Like Him” is not a valid argument, sir.
Some notes of support started to trickle in. Rob is a Mets fan and hates pretty much everything.
Rob
Wins and ERA for a pitcher are overrated. But the dude had a career 1.192 WHIP in the AL in the toughest division in baseball. His post season WHIP? lower…. 1.10.
In 18 seasons, he made 15 errors. That stat jumped off the page at me. That’s impressive.
5 time all-star.
200 Ks 4 times and averaged 178 per year. That is consistency.
He also averaged 34 starts a year, with and 226 innings.
And he did all this during the Steroid Era! That shouldn’t be discounted.
And the no rings argument… Ted Williams had no rings either. How many rings did Hank Aaron have?
Plus he was a quiet competitor that never opened his mouth, never pissed anyone off and any of us would have been happy to have him on their team.
I can see the arguments for him not being first ballot maybe… but to say unequivocally that no way, he’s not a Hall of Famer? Not sure i get that argument.
John
Maybe the easier test is would you be excited to see Mussina as the starter if you went to a game. If you had to travel back to the nineties where would Mussina be on the list of pitchers to see.
I’d have preferred to see Maddux, Smoltz, Johnson, Pedro but Mussina would have been a nice option. I have no problem if Mussina gets in as long as he waits a few years.
With the O’s he had a .645 winning percentage while the team had a .497 the same years. I’d consider that fairly dominant. He wins 2/3 of his games while the team wins 1/2 is a big step up. He goes to the Yankees and his winning percentage dips slightly to .631 but they Yankees had a .598 winning percentage those same years. Not a big upgrade over the rest of their staff.
Here is the list of eligible players coming up.
I’m fine with Mussina going in once Schilling (2013), Maddux (2014), Glavine/Smoltz/Pedro/Johnson (2015) all get in. With the log jam in 2015/2016 if Mussina doesn’t get elected in 2014 I think he may have to wait a while.
As mentioned in part one. Chuck is a hardcore Yankee fan. Rob and I often disagree with him. Of course, this is often because he suggests that ridiculous WFAN trades are “good business sense.” As is noted with the succeeding martyr complex.
Chuck
Okay it’s official. I now know certain people just automatically disagree with me on everything. Example Tom and Rob are arguing that Mike Mussina is a Hall of Famer. Wow that is like Pete donning a Red Sox shirt and foam finger.
Tom
@Chuck: Example Tom and Rob are arguing that Mike Mussina is a hall of famer.
I’m arguing that it’s closer then you think. I haven’t heard any real, solid arguments to convince me he shouldn’t be.
Then, like a bolt from nowhere, Hulse joins the fray. I’ve mentioned Hulse in this space before and he joined the list via me. Chuck and Hulse have formed a somewhat hate/hate relationship and Hulse responds as one would expect.
Mike
Tom stole my trick where i paste each line from someone and dismantle it….but I’m still gonna do it to make my points.
@Chuck: – 0 rings
So if Mo Rivera doesn’t blow game 7, 2001…or if The Yankees don’t fall to Josh Beckett on 2 days rest in 2003….or possibly in 2004 if the Yankees don’t gag up the biggest postseason choke job in history…he’s got one ring if not more. None of those things were his fault.
@Chuck: – Carried a staff 2 times 1996 and 1997
I guess his 20 wins LAST YEAR mean nothing. Also, if you look at some other seasons by wins, losses, ERA by year….
1992, 18-5, 2.54
1994, 16-5, 3.06 ERA…and he lost between 8 and 10 starts due to the strike that season so he probably would have won 20 and possibly a Cy Young
1995, 19-9, 3.29 ERA
1997, 15-8, 3.20 ERA
1999, 18-7, 3.50 ERA
2000 (this is nuts)…11-15….with a 3.79 ERA, 237 IP, 210 k’s, 1.187 WHIP. How does he go 11 and 15?!?
2001, 17-11, 3.15
2002, 18-10, 4.05
2003, 17-8, 3.40
After 11 years of being an elite level pitcher who was in the top 6 for the Cy Young EIGHT times (like most 3 starters in baseball I guess)….he finally declined a little…although…
2006, 15-7, 3.51 ERA
2008, 20-9, 3.37 ERA
@Chuck: – 0 Cy Youngs
Top 6 eight times. It’s tough to win a Cy Young when you’re in the same league as Roger Clemens and Pedro Martinez, along with Randy Johnson for a few years.
@Chuck: – Rarely even the third best guy on the staff
This is insanity. His time in Baltimore he was undoubtedly their Ace. On the Yankees for a few years you can argue Clemens was better, maybe.
@Chuck: – 1 good postseason start in the ALDS vs the A’s in 2001. He even sucked as an O against the Yanks.
Tom covered this. He had exactly ONE start against the Yankees as an Oriole, so to say he ‘sucked’ is a little harsh because it was one time ever. In 1997 his ALDS was 2-0 with a 1.93 ERA, ALCS was 0-0 with a 0.60 ERA!!! CLOSERS don’t do that. He threw 7 shutout innings against Oakland in 2001, which was nice. Of course, Mo Rivera pitched in that game so it does not count. See insane logic below.
@Chuck: – Pitched well in relief against the Sox in 2003, but wasn’t even the best pitcher in the game — Rivera was.
By this logic, every single Yankee to ever take the mound in the playoffs from 1996 to today can not possibly make the Hall of Fame.
@Chuck: – Played for teams with an almost .600 winning percentage and won 20 games once last season.
So… wait…. his wins don’t count because he was on good teams? The guy pitched GREAT year after year, won 18 or 19 games 6 times, 17 games 3 more times. So with a little luck, or maybe a team that was better, he could have won 20 like 8 times. The fact that he didn’t is absolutely not his fault.
@Chuck: – Nibbled all the time
I didn’t know you had to throw a 98 MPH fastball with actual smoke coming off of it to make the Hall of Fame. Someone better tell Greg Maddux that his Cooperstown votes aren’t coming.
@Chuck: – Was slow to the plate
So? Are you shitting me? In the thousands of cases made for pitchers going to the Hall of Fame in the history of mankind… nobody has EVER ONCE taken this into account.
@Chuck: – Never took responsibility for letting the team down
Again, nothing to do with a Hall of Fame career, also, why should he take responsibility for the fact that his team was blowing games for him all the time while he was posting low 3 ERA’s and making 34 starts a year like clockwork?
@Chuck: – Retired not because he didn’t want to play anymore or he couldn’t but rather because he wasn’t gonna get paid
So? This also has no bearing. Is anyone thinking Tom Glavine is more or less of a HOF guy because of the past 2 seasons where he played for the minimum and got shelled?
@Chuck: – Bolted the Os for more money
If this was a requirement to make it to Cooperstown, NOBODY would make it. The guys who bolt teams bolt because they can make more money. It’s how things work now. The Orioles are cheap.
@Chuck: – Held the Yanks hostage after the 2006 season
Oh spare me for the love of all that is Holy. I’ve watched the Yankees burn piles of money on awful pitchers year after year, so it’s on Moose to want to get paid?
Chuck….you’ve failed. I hope you try and convince the actual HOF that Moose shouldn’t go, they’ll put him in unanimously.
But just when Chuck is on the ropes, former IP/411 writer Mark U joins up for the bad guys.
Mark U
I’ll throw this out about Moose. Decide for yourself.
In 2001 he was just behind Clemens as the best pitcher on the Yanks.
In 2002 he was just behind David Wells (higher ERA, 3 more losses, 1 less win) for the best pitcher on the Yanks.
In 2003, he was on par with Andy Pettite (lower ERA, fewer wins) for the best pitcher on the Yanks.
In 2004, Jon Leiber had a lower ERA and more wins. Pettite was on par with Vasquez for 2nd best.
In 2005, he had fewer wins and a higher ERA than Randy Johnson and was 2nd best.
In 2006, he had fewer wins than Randy Johnson and Chien Ming Wang, but a better ERA.
In 2007, he had fewer wins, more losses and a higher ERA than both Pettite and Wang.
In 2008, he was clearly the best pitcher on the team, winning 20 and having the best ERA.
In 8 years with the Yanks he was only clearly the best pitcher on the team in 1 season. And some of the guys who were better, or even with him, were David Wells and Chien Ming Wang. That’s just not HOF to me. It’s interesting that we’re having the conversation as to why he doesn’t belong in the Hall rather than why he does belong in the Hall for the most part. My vote is no.
Pete
Mark, hypothetical question. Taking into consideration what you just said, had he returned this season and next season, won 15 games in both seasons, but was not better than Sabathia or Burnett, but had 300 wins, would he be a Hall of Famer?
Up next, we make fun of Mark for avoiding Pete’s question and Hulse picks apart Mark’s response.
The Mike Mussina Hall Of Fame Case – Part 1
About a year ago, Inside Pulse’s Matthew Michaels invited me to join an e-mail list that started between he and some work friends some years ago. As the original guys went off in different directions, it’s added people. As of now, I think it stands around 25 people in politics, PR, legal, web, and other industries. Some are former Pulse writers. Last week former 411/IP writer and fellow WFAN listener Chris [Matthew Michaels's brother] sent around a bulleted list of sports points and complaints and one of the items ended up sparking a long e-mail firestorm. The bullet was:
Chris
–WFAN CALLERS — STOP IT! MIKE MUSSINA IS NOT A HALL OF FAMER!!!
At first, I let this go. I don’t usually get in to Hall debates because of the stupid subjectivity. But, eventually I found the arguments against to be so bad I had to respond. Some of these writers you’ll know. I’m not going to really identify any of them because I’m not entirely sure they want their names out there. I will note background info where I can. These will be unedited save for capitalization and spelling.
Justin
Mussina would be a Hall of Famer if he pitched three more seasons and reached the 300 win club.
Chris B
Maybe, but I even hate that Glavine is going in. Smoltz and Maddux were much better than he was. And, again, a guy like Schilling and Pedro deserve it for their short-term dominance, rather than these guys who just hung around long enough to compile without ever dominating.
Mussina a compiler? Can you really call a guy who had one of the best seasons of his career in his last year a compiler? Still, not quite enough to get involved. Especially as some other list members made the points I was going to make.
Peter
Citing Mussina’s Wikipedia page.
Mussina’s candidacy for the Hall of Fame has come under recent debate. “Do I compare to some guys who are in? I think I do,” Mussina told USA Today in 2006. The only other pitchers to match Mussina’s 17 seasons of 10 or more victories are Greg Maddux, Warren Spahn, Cy Young, Don Sutton and Steve Carlton; all are Hall of Famers except Maddux, who also retired after the 2008 season and thus is not yet eligible. Of the 23 eligible pitchers who have at least 265 wins and an ERA of 3.69 or less, 20 are in the Hall of Fame. Mussina’s consistency is often overshadowed by the dominant peaks of contemporaries like Pedro Martínez and Randy Johnson. Baseball writer Tim Kurkjian stated on the August 3, 2008 edition of Baseball Tonight “He’s a Hall of Famer. I’ve looked at the numbers and he’s in.”
He is the oldest pitcher to ever win 20 games in a season for the first time at the age of 39 in 2008. He never won the Cy Young Award, but finished in the top six of Cy Young voting eight times. Mussina also came tantalizingly close to pitching a perfect game and winning a World Series, having lost chances at achieving both in the 9th inning in 2001.
Only five pitchers in the history of major league baseball have as many victories as Mussina and a better winning percentage: Lefty Grove, Christy Mathewson, Grover Cleveland Alexander,Roger Clemens and Randy Johnson.
Greg
There may be a movement brewing where guys who were quiet and got the job done will gain votes vs. guys that chased home run records and stole headlines. If he doesn’t get in on numbers, he may get in for being the right kind of guy for the voters in the years coming up. I say he gets in, but don’t care that much except that I think he’s one of the good guys and would be happy for him.
At this point – it seemed like the debate would be friendly. Perhaps neutral and the Sports Musings group would come to the conclusion that he’s a pretty good pitcher and it could probably go either way. Until this point, I hadn’t even chimed in… I’d just been reading the opinions. But then, the godfather of the e-mail list chimed in. Chuck is the resident hardcore Yankee fan. Loves sports, loves predicting, and as we learned in Atlantic City, loves red wine.
Chuck
Moose is not a Hall of Famer. Period. End of story. Actually, in my book, he isn’t even close. He is the classic two or three starter that hung around a while and pitched on good teams. Also a terrible big game starter.
And agreements started rolling in.
Chris B
Chaz, I agree with you, 100%. Wow. ;-)
Justin
He would have 300 wins if o’s gave more run support
And only one disagreement
Peter
He also pitched in the best division in baseball his whole career and still amassed 270 wins and the 6th best winning % of any pitcher with that many wins. That’s impressive. I’m sorry. People can knock him all they want but not many pitchers can say they pitched as well for as long as he did.
And this is where I finally had to join the fray. The talk about wins had become just too much.
Tom
The “wins” stat is the most retarded hall of fame statistic ever. “Hey, let’s use this stat which largely has nothing to do with pitching to figure out how good of a pitcher you were.” If you insist on using them, though, 120 games over .500 is pretty ridiculously awesome.
And thus arrived former IP writer Coach Coogan.
Coogan
Is it me or is he not as good as Bert Blyleven was? And BB isn’t in … …
Interesting debate, though. Agree it could either way and I wouldn’t be offended if he got in.
To end part one, I’ll present the e-mail that got myself and my friend Mike fully in to the debate. Remember: hardcore Yankee fan.
Chuck
Ok, I’ll play this installment of why Mike Mussina is not a Hall of Famer:
- 0 rings.
- Carried a staff 2 times 1996 and 1997.
- 0 Cy Youngs.
- Limited All-Star appearances.
- Rarely even the third best guy on the staff.
- One good post season start in the ALDS vs the A’s in 2001. He even sucked as an Oriole against the Yanks.
- Pitched well in relief against the Red Sox in 2003. But wasn’t even the best pitcher in the game — Rivera was.
- Played for teams with almost a 600 winning percentage and won 20 games once last season.
- Nibbled all the time.
- Was slow to the plate.
- Never took responsibility for letting the team down.
- Retired not because he didn’t want to play anymore or he couldn’t but rather because he wasn’t getting paid.
- Bolted the Os for more money.
- Held the Yanks hostage after the 2006 season.
In part two, Hulse and I dismantle the previous e-mail and former IP/411 writer Mark U joins the fray — with the bad guys.
This is being cross-posted on the email group’s new blog — Original Sports Musings.