1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Baseball HOF: Who makes it in addition to Ripken and Gwynn?

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by BYH, Jan 9, 2007.

  1. Columbo

    Columbo Active Member

    In 10 years... writers will be hacking off testicles to find a reason to induct a pitcher, since none will have 300 wins.

    Morris, Blyleven and John will all have to get more serious consideration then.

    Morris is just a fucking travesty.
     
  2. BYH

    BYH Active Member

    John won't get any consideration in 10 years, since he'll be off the ballot.

    Perhaps time will help Morris and Blyleven. I'm not that confident.
     
  3. dooley_womack1

    dooley_womack1 Well-Known Member

    Then put Dr. Andrews in the Hall. Jim Kaat should get into the Hall before Tommy John. Hell no on Blyleven, and I just can't go with Gossage, just as I couldn't go with Eckersley: too many fair to middling years.
     
  4. Bubbler

    Bubbler Well-Known Member

    See, I kind of get the rancor towards Sutton, but on the other hand, he was the undisputed ace of the 70s Dodgers -- a team that won three pennants. He's better than Blyleven in that regard.
     
  5. Smasher_Sloan

    Smasher_Sloan Active Member

    " he was the undisputed ace of the 70s Dodgers"


    Not even close. There were two seasons in the '70s ('73 and '76) where he was the Dodgers' best starting pitcher.

    The other years, he was behind:

    70 -- Claude Osteen
    71 -- Al Downing
    72 -- Osteen
    74 -- Andy Messersmith
    75 -- Messersmith, Burt Hooton
    77 -- Tommy John
    78 -- Hooton, John, Doug Rau
    79 -- Rick Sutcliffe
     
  6. Tom Petty

    Tom Petty Guest

    smasher, i believe the quote was "he was the undisputed ace of the 70s Dodgers."

    your response was "Not even close."

    for your convenience, here is a list of games won by dodger pitchers (you listed) throughout the 70s:
    osteen - 66 wins
    downing - 56
    messersmith - 33
    hooten - 71
    john - 87
    rau - 90
    sutcliffe - 17
    sutton - 166, and had an era higher than 3.23 three times throughout the decade.

    yes, don sutton was the undisputed ace of the dodger staff in the 70s.
     
  7. Smasher_Sloan

    Smasher_Sloan Active Member

    I haven't called Elias to verify, but I'm wondering if the fact he was the only starter who was there all 10 years factored into his having the most wins in that period?

    Osteen was there from '70-'73. Downing was '71-'77, the last three years as a reliever. Messersmith was '73-'75. Hooton was '76-'79. John was '72-'78, with no '75 season. Rau was '72-'79 and Sutcliffe was limited to three games before his official rookie season in '79.

    "Ace" means you're the team's best pitcher. Sutton qualified as the Dodgers' best starter in two of 10 seasons in the '70s.

    In the years that Osteen won 66 games, Sutton won 69. In the years that Hooton won 71, Sutton won 62.

    You are correct that he was generally better than Doug Rau. But not in 1978.
     
  8. Tom Petty

    Tom Petty Guest

    jesus smasher, sutton was the dodgers' best pitcher throughout the decade of the '70s.

    seems pretty simple ... maybe i'm missing something.
     
  9. zeke12

    zeke12 Guest

    Blyleven is fifth all time in strikeouts, the best measure of a pitcher's dominance. Where is Don Sutton on that list?
     
  10. jagtrader

    jagtrader Active Member

    So strikeouts are the major criteria now?

    Sutton has more wins, a slightly lower ERA and a slightly lower WHIP than Blyleven. If you look at ERA+, Blyleven has a 10 point edge. Neither is a Hall of Famer or was an elite pitcher for an extended period. They both stuck around long enough to get an argument. Suttom got to 300 wins and cheated to get there, so he's supposedly worthy.
     
  11. Michael_ Gee

    Michael_ Gee Well-Known Member

    I find it highly amusing (note to desk, didn't use "ironic") a thread with Cal Ripken's name in the title devolved into the annual rant about Don Sutton.
    Here's the deal. When assessing a player's worth LONGEVITY COUNTS! Being damn good for decades is a tremendous accomplishment. It's not like Sutton (or Blyleven, for whom I do vote annually) came to camp every spring facing no competition for a spot in their team's starting rotation. Three hundred twenty four wins is a Hall of Fame credential no matter what.
    Every year the Hall of Fame arguments reveal a bizarre anomaly. There are many people in sports journalism and even more among plain old fans who'll insist they love baseball, but at the same time seem to hate baseball players.
     
  12. zeke12

    zeke12 Guest

    Since when have strikeouts not been a major criteria for pitchers? Your argument adressed dominance, and I would counter that Blyleven is fifth all-time in the only true statistical reflection of dominance.

    If you want the overall argument, I'll repost it, once again citing Rich Lederer at baseballanalysts.com:

    Since 1900, Bert Blyleven ranks 5th in career strikeouts, 8th in shutouts, and 17th in wins.

    I, Like Mr. Gee, am continually baffled the Blyleven's status as a horse who took the ball every fourth day, finished his own games and pitched in the Majors for 20 years are held against him when it comes to HOF balloting.

    Absolutely baffled.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page