Clayton Kershaw: Hall of Famer?

The electorate will be completely different, though, and, by then, a lot of the sabermetric mentality will have become entrenched. Not the hardcore stuff, mind you. But OBP, ERA > wins, etc., etc.

And even putting sabermetrics aside, I think that the voters are certainly smart enough to understand that the game has changed, regarding how pitching staffs are handled.

 

No, no, no. He already has about 20 more career victories than McDowell (146-127). He has six top 10 Cy finishes to McDowell's three. I loved Jack McDowell. He was one of the last of a breed. But Verlander has been better for longer at this point.

 

Verlander also has an MVP, which doesn't hurt.

For Kershaw, I can't imagine anyone with three (almost four) Cy Youngs not getting in, but if he completely fell off the map, it's possible.

Santana won two and was in the top 7 for the Cy Young six straight seasons. If he gets in, Verlander and Kershaw become locks, if they're not already.

 

Exactly why wins are a ridiculous way to judge pitchers.

 

I don't understand such love for Verlander. You're talking about a guy who has two very good/great seasons (ERAs of 2.40 and 2.64, not exactly historic) and has never had another season below 3.37.

He's actually pretty overrated when he is discussed in the Kershaw/Felix group.

 

Two reasons:

1) Strikeouts;

2) Some of those mid-3.00 ERAs came when that was still impressive.

 

OK, let me put it this way -- his two best seasons are the only seasons he has been in the top five in the AL or the top 10 in MLB in ERA.

 

A year or two ago, someone on here said that King Felix has had a better career than Verlander.

Right away, I was like, "Bullshit. No way."

Then I compared and it was true. You could have knocked me over with a feather.

Those wins, they still get in your head.

 

You have to be careful with strikeout numbers for pitchers the same way as you are careful of HR numbers for hitters.

Strikeouts are way up over recently because we got so used to guys coupling high K numbers with a lot of HRs so hitters now accept the Ks more. Also, the more you work the count to crank up pitch counts and draw walks, the more you'll strike out.

I'm not saying Kershaw isn't awesome. I would just be careful in using that stat specifically when comparing to great pitchers from earlier eras.

 

I would love for Mussina to take a lie detector test about ending his career when he did. Win 20 games with a 3.37 ERA in 200 innings at 39 and retire at 270 wins.

Has a 270-153 record, 3,500 innings, 2,800 Ks just under 800 walks. Got 20 percent in the voting.

Could have needed just two years to be on the door of or just past 300 victories and would be a shoo in.

 

That doesn't even come close to answering his question and it is a terrible way to make the comparison.

 

You are becoming so predictable. You don't really understand how quotes are supposed to work, do you?