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!

Tim Hudson: Hall of Famer?

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Dick Whitman, May 1, 2013.

  1. Dick Whitman

    Dick Whitman Well-Known Member

    He beat the '27 Yankees last night for win No. 200 of his career:


    He definitely has a strong case. Based on intuition and a quick scan of the numbers, I say "yes."
  2. deskslave

    deskslave Active Member

    Assuming he pitches a couple or three more years and continues to be effective, ending up with 230-240 wins, I would say yes as well. I think he's a template for what a Hall of Fame pitcher will look like in future, in an era of innings limits, etc. If the voters don't modify the criteria, then it's possible he doesn't. But if they don't, it will confirm them as being completely out of touch with the reality of the sport.
  3. Cubbiebum

    Cubbiebum Member

    His chances are highly doubtful. Not sure it's even possible. His career ERA is average for the Hall of Fame and is likely to get worse as he pitches his last years. Then there is the complete and total lack of strikeouts.

    The only thing he has going for him is a good W-L record. That is it. Every thing else screams no.
  4. deskslave

    deskslave Active Member

    He also pitched at the height of the steroid era. If there's likely to be some correction for hitting statistics when it comes to the Hall (500 HRs no longer being automatic, for example), shouldn't the same apply for pitching stats?
  5. Love Tim Hudson, but he only belongs in the Hall of Very Good. There's just nothing that says HOF. Just a three-time All-Star, only one 20-win season, no Cy Youngs, no big postseason success. Honestly, unless he has one or two more huge seasons, I don't think he even comes particularly close.

  6. Gehrig

    Gehrig Active Member

    Without any serious ink, records or post-season big moments, it's just a nice milestone.
  7. Mizzougrad96

    Mizzougrad96 Active Member

    I don't know...

    His ERA is very good. While his wins total is low, his winning percentage is pretty high. He only has one 20-win season...

    I think if his next 2-3 seasons are similar to his last three, he has a decent chance. That would give him another 30-40 wins and would help his chances immensely. That may be a lot to ask for someone who is 37.

    If he retired tomorrow, no chance.
  8. 93Devil

    93Devil Well-Known Member

  9. Versatile

    Versatile Active Member

    All stats via baseball-reference.com:

    Tim Hudson: 3.42 ERA, 200-105, 1,825 K, 1.235 WHIP, 6.0 K/9, 2.2 K/BB, 2,717 IP, 125 ERA+, 54.8 WAR
    David Cone: 3.46 ERA, 194-126, 2,668 K, 1.256 WHIP, 8.3 K/9, 2.4 K/BB, 2,898 IP, 121 ERA+, 61.7 WAR

    Cone also has four World Series rings and a Cy Young Award. But he received 3.9 percent of the vote in 2009 and fell off the ballot.

    Curt Schilling, Mike Mussina, Roy Halladay, John Smoltz and (though he is tarnished by steroid use) Kevin Brown have much stronger arguments than either Cone or Hudson. Johan Santana may have one, too. I will hold off on this decision.
  10. Dick Whitman

    Dick Whitman Well-Known Member

    And, honestly, it was a travesty. He deserved a far longer look. Six more wins, and I think he's still generating discussion at this point, with perhaps a Blyleven gradual rise.
  11. dooley_womack1

    dooley_womack1 Well-Known Member

    I would say more pants shitter than pants pisser.
  12. Versatile

    Versatile Active Member

    He almost certainly would have those six wins had two of his best seasons not been shortened by the strike.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page