David Cone and Orel Hershiser

I think they've mostly got it right, right now. I think the most glaring omissions right now are Tim Raines and Ron Santo, but I think both of them eventually get in, along with guys who didn't get on these past couple years but are probably deserving (Bagwell).

 

Maddux ;-).

 

Two reasons. 1) Mullane is pretty clearly in the second tier of 1880s-1890s pitchers behind Rusie, Young, Nichols, Radbourn, Keefe, Clarkson, Welch. He's at the top of the second tier, certainly, but he's not as good as those guys. 2) He had most of his success in the American Association, which was an inferior league to the National League. After he moved to the NL in 1890 ... and, like many in his generation, after the mound was moved back to 60'6" in 1893, he couldn't adapt as well.

That said, if Tony doesn't hold out for a season at age 26, he probably finishes with about 310 wins and that might have pushed him over the top with the Veterans Committee. It wouldn't be an outrage if he was in, but he's not really that deserving, either.

Bobby Mathews, who finished with 297 career wins, has the same problem as reason (2) above -- his stats were compiled in the NA and AA -- and he'll never sniff the Hall of Fame. Good reading on him here: http://bioproj.sabr.org/bioproj.cfm?a=v&v=l&bid=3055&pid=8952.

 

Maybe I'm being swayed a little too much by the championship mystique from those Yankee teams, but I felt that Cone is just as Hall worthy if not more so than Mussina.

 

Let's not get carried away here.

Cone: 194-126
Mussina: 270-153

Not that W-L is a be-all, end-all, but your argument can't even begin to gain legitimacy until Cone makes up for those 76 wins.

 

I wonder how many more games Hershiser wins in 86-87 if Pedro Guerrero doesn't blow out his knee. Those Dodgers teams were absolutely dreadful offensively. Ohh, and as brilliant as Orel was in '88, lets not forget he also led them to the 1985 NL West title with a 19-3 record and an ERA of 2.03.

 

At some point, does being a part of those great Yankees teams start to work against guys like Mussina and Cone?
You've already got several guys who are locks (Jeter, Rivera, Clemens), a few who are borderline but were so integral to those teams' success that they'll get some benefit of the doubt (Posada, Pettitte, Bernie Williams), and then some others further down the line that weren't part of the dynasty but will be associated with the Yankees when their turn comes (A-Rod, Teixeira).
By the time you get to Cone and Mussina, there's at least a half-dozen Yankees on that list who will merit strong consideration. At some point Yankee fatigue has got to set in.

 

Hershiser was an amazing pitcher, but was not a "dominant pitcher of his era" for long enough to warrant the HOF in my opinion.

 

No argument, but if he would have tacked on 5-7 years of "very good" to that 85-89 stretch, he'd be in the conversation. But it was five outstanding years, rotator cuff surgery, lots of meh years, then a decent end for which he's been accused on this board of juicing. ;-).

A little Kurt Warner-ish. I'm sure this analogy will be picked apart, but it's similar. The year the Rams won the Super Bowl and Warner was unbelievable, the year the Dodgers won the World Series and Hershiser had his unbelievable streak of scoreless innings.

Then both declined, Hershiser because of injury and appeared down and out. But then towards the end of his career, Warner led the Cardinals to the Super Bowl and Hershiser was on a couple of World Series staffs with the Indians.

Both had too-brief stretches being elite. Both had one last run at the end after they had become afterthoughts. Warner probably had a stronger finish than Hershiser, but it was similar.

 

Don't the championships and having a lower career ERA help do just that?

 

If you wanna find the best, simple way to rate pitchers, in my opinion, it's ERA+. I think ERA is a wonderful way to evaluate pitchers, and ERA+ basically normalizes for the league (so a 3.50 in 1968 is not equal to a 3.50 in 2002).

Anyway, here are the top pitchers in ERA+ who are not in the HOF (minimum 300 starts) (If you're looking for Jack Morris, he's not in the top 50. His ERA+ is 105, same as John Denny.)

<PRE>
Rk Player ERA+
1 Pedro Martinez 154
2 Roger Clemens 143
3 Roy Halladay 137
4 Randy Johnson 136
5 Roy Oswalt 134
6 Greg Maddux 132
7 Curt Schilling 128
8 Kevin Brown 127
9 Tim Hudson 127
10 Bret Saberhagen 126
11 Tommy Bridges 126
12 John Smoltz 125
13 CC Sabathia 124
14 Urban Shocker 124
15 Dizzy Trout 124
16 Eddie Cicotte 123
17 Ed Reulbach 123
18 Mike Mussina 123
19 Dave Stieb 123
20 Jimmy Key 122
21 Kevin Appier 121
22 Mark Buehrle 121
23 David Cone 121
24 Hippo Vaughn 120
25 Carl Mays 120
Rk Player ERA+
26 Ron Guidry 119
27 Lon Warneke 119
28 Billy Pierce 119
29 Dutch Leonard 119
30 Tom Glavine 118
31 Dolf Luque 118
32 Babe Adams 118
33 Andy Pettitte 117
34 Wes Ferrell 117
35 Virgil Trucks 117
36 Wilbur Cooper 116
37 Bucky Walters 116
38 Eddie Lopat 116
39 Steve Rogers 116
40 Chris Carpenter 116
41 Chuck Finley 115
42 Luis Tiant 115
43 John Candelaria 114
44 Jon Matlack 114
45 Larry French 114
46 Rick Reuschel 114
47 Jack Quinn 114
48 Slim Sallee 114
49 Bob Shawkey 114
50 Doc White 113
</PRE>

Kevin Brown, who is the top player to have actually appeared on the ballot, got just 12 votes (2 percent) and fell off the ballot. That seems pretty wrong, to me. (Although I didn't vote for him, but I did give him a long look.)

 

One more for Kevin Brown...

These are the guys with the most seasons with an ERA+ of 150 or more. (Most years there are 7 pitchers or fewer whose ERA+ cracks 150.)

<PRE>
Rk Yrs
1 Lefty Grove 11
2 Greg Maddux 9
3 Roger Clemens 9
4 Randy Johnson 8
5 Walter Johnson 8
6 Christy Mathewson 7
7 Pedro Martinez 6
8 Pete Alexander 6
9 Roy Halladay 5
10 Kevin Brown 5
11 Steve Carlton 5
12 Ed Walsh 5
13 Mordecai Brown 5
14 Johan Santana 4
15 Tom Seaver 4
16 Jim Palmer 4
17 Sandy Koufax 4
18 Hal Newhouser 4
19 Stan Coveleski 4
20 Eddie Cicotte 4
21 Brandon Webb 3
22 Jose Rijo 3
23 Juan Marichal 3
24 Bob Gibson 3
25 Whitey Ford 3
</PRE>

Man, maybe I should have voted for him!

(Yes, I know he was probably a juicer. That certainly doesn't help his case. He also had a lot of mediocrity at the end of his career that probably colored people's memories.)