Jamie Moyer, HOFer?

[novelist_wannabe]

My assertion from this discussion on the baseball running thread (which, it appears, Conlin is trolling for material):

If he gets to 300 -- and I think that's a big if -- he may very well define the line between in and out. With 300 wins, he's right there with Phil Niekro. But Niekro's ERA is nearly a run lower and he has almost 1,000 more strikeouts than Moyer, who has never led the league in one positive category and has six seasons with ERAs over 5.00. Even with 300 wins, I don't think this is a hard no vote.

None of the discussion on that thread or this one has changed my mind. Congrats to Jamie if he gets to 300 wins, but no way should he be a Hall of Famer.

 

[Drip]

I have a vote BYH, and if Moyer gets to 300, I'll sure vote for him, because that'd mean he was winning games in the bigs at age 50, and that would be Hall worthy.
300 wins is far from a meaningless stat. It is a lifetime marker. You have to have been able to get guys out for going on two decades to get there. It's not like it's EASY to hold a major league starting rotation job. Do it for 20 years, you are bound to be in the Hall conversation. Three hundred and you're in.
I see by this thread that once again stats are being used not always to illuminate, but to bolster the underlying assumption that most ballplayers just don't measure up to some imaginary concept of perfection, ergo, they don't honors or renown.

I've got one too Michael and you're right, if he gets 300, it will deserve merit but there are other pitchers who belong in there before him.

 

[JC]

I have a vote BYH, and if Moyer gets to 300, I'll sure vote for him, because that'd mean he was winning games in the bigs at age 50, and that would be Hall worthy.
300 wins is far from a meaningless stat. It is a lifetime marker. You have to have been able to get guys out for going on two decades to get there. It's not like it's EASY to hold a major league starting rotation job. Do it for 20 years, you are bound to be in the Hall conversation. Three hundred and you're in.
I see by this thread that once again stats are being used not always to illuminate, but to bolster the underlying assumption that most ballplayers just don't measure up to some imaginary concept of perfection, ergo, they don't honors or renown.

I've got one too Michael and you're right, if he gets 300, it will deserve merit but there are other pitchers who belong in there before him.

If true, which I doubt, the Hall just lost all credibility

 

[Drip]

I have a vote BYH, and if Moyer gets to 300, I'll sure vote for him, because that'd mean he was winning games in the bigs at age 50, and that would be Hall worthy.
300 wins is far from a meaningless stat. It is a lifetime marker. You have to have been able to get guys out for going on two decades to get there. It's not like it's EASY to hold a major league starting rotation job. Do it for 20 years, you are bound to be in the Hall conversation. Three hundred and you're in.
I see by this thread that once again stats are being used not always to illuminate, but to bolster the underlying assumption that most ballplayers just don't measure up to some imaginary concept of perfection, ergo, they don't honors or renown.

I've got one too Michael and you're right, if he gets 300, it will deserve merit but there are other pitchers who belong in there before him.

If true, which I doubt, the Hall just lost all credibility

What is your malfunction?

 

[YankeeFan]

I have a vote BYH, and if Moyer gets to 300, I'll sure vote for him, because that'd mean he was winning games in the bigs at age 50, and that would be Hall worthy.
300 wins is far from a meaningless stat. It is a lifetime marker. You have to have been able to get guys out for going on two decades to get there. It's not like it's EASY to hold a major league starting rotation job. Do it for 20 years, you are bound to be in the Hall conversation. Three hundred and you're in.
I see by this thread that once again stats are being used not always to illuminate, but to bolster the underlying assumption that most ballplayers just don't measure up to some imaginary concept of perfection, ergo, they don't honors or renown.

I've got one too Michael and you're right, if he gets 300, it will deserve merit but there are other pitchers who belong in there before him.

If true, which I doubt, the Hall just lost all credibility

What is your malfunction?

I don't recall you ever saying that you were a Hall of Fame voter before.

Maybe you have, but I don't remember.

And Drip, you have to understand that you say a lot of things that stretch the belief of the audience here. And since you also tend to name drop and indicate how important & connected you are, it seems odd that you would have neglected to previously mention that you are a Hall voter.

I mean, Hall debates come up periodically and I think we're all interested in the opinions of Hall voters like Michael, not just for their own opinion but because they have a good sense of how the rest of the members will view a particular candidate.

For these reasons, I think it's understandable that JC, myself and others might express surprise at this revelation that you are a voter.

 

[Hank_Scorpio]

He gets a nice spot in the Hall of Good.

Man, that's tough. He can't even get in the Hall of Very Good? :D

 

[forever_town]

Jamie Moyer is practically the poster child for a Hall of Barely Above Average. He is not a Hall of Famer.

 

[Tarheel316]

I don't care if it takes the guy 37 years to get there. 300 deserves enshrinement.

Even with an ERA over 4? He's good, not great.

 

[micropolitan guy]

amie Moyer is practically the poster child for a Hall of Barely Above Average. He is not a Hall of Famer.

Yes, because most average MLB pitchers win 250 games in their career so the ones with 267 career wins are barely above average.

 

[RickStain]

I'd like to again remind everyone that this is the Hall of *Fame*, not the Hall of Absolutely The Best Ballplayers Without Question.

and that means something different to every individual. For me, it should be reserved for the best of the best. I know that will never happen but when guys with ERA's of 4.23 are now considered HOFers I think it's insane.

That's fine if everyone wants their own definition. But the "HOUG" people need to quit acting like their meaning is the only acceptable one.

 

[outofplace]

Conlin builds that whole column around Moyer's win total. What are Moyer's other career numbers? His ERA is 4.22 -- definitely pedestrian. Ryan's, by contrast, was 3.19.

I'm certainly with those saying F no.

Well, he also figures in Moyer's salary, arguing that he is a bargain this season compared to Johan Santana. What the **** does that have to do with Hall of Fame credentials?

Found this in a search for Conlin and Hall of Fame and I have a hard time disagreeing. Every time I see an explanation from him of an odd decision, Conlin reminds me what a disgrace it is that he ever even got to vote.
http://deadspin.com/5443162/presenting-the-absolute-worst-hall-of-fame-voter-update

 

[Professor Snape]

Why should some artificial number automatically get you into the Hall? He's shown remarkable longevity, but has he ever been considered even one of the top ten pitchers in the game at any given time.

yeah, how about right now, in his late 40s

only six pitchers have more wins since opening day 2007 than Moyer

64 ... C.C. Sabbathia
62 ... Roy Halladay
56 ... Justin Verlander
54 ... Adam Wainwright
52 ... Dan Haren
52 ... Andy Pettitte
51 ... Jamie Moyer

moyer has 9 wins in 14 starts this year and is as effective today as he's ever been. in his last three starts, he's pitched 23 innings and allowed 5 earned runs

he's on pace to win 19 this year, which would put him at 277 going into 2011

if he stays healthy - granted a big if - he'll win 23 more games by 2012 and get to 300, and if he does, he's in

everybody who pitched in this century and won 290 games (and is eligible) is in

 

[da man]

I'm not a big baseball guy, but Niekro is the one guy I see in the Hall and think, "Why the hell is he in there?"

Moyer in the Hall would strike me the same way.

 

[Moderator1]

Talked about this with a friend at the Nats-Os game Sunday. He's an incredible story because he's still rather effective at an advanced age. I'd call his career really close to great at this point. 100+ wins after age 40, right?

But in my mind, really good for a long time doesn't get you in the Hall. You have to be really great for a long time.

That said, 300 wins is quite a number. Think about that. If my math is correct, that's 15 seasons of winning 20 games. Damnnnnn.

Digger's son-in-law isn't a Hall qualifying thing, either, by the way.

 

[RickStain]

Why should some artificial number automatically get you into the Hall? He's shown remarkable longevity, but has he ever been considered even one of the top ten pitchers in the game at any given time.

yeah, how about right now, in his late 40s

only six pitchers have more wins since opening day 2007 than Moyer

64 ... C.C. Sabbathia
62 ... Roy Halladay
56 ... Justin Verlander
54 ... Adam Wainwright
52 ... Dan Haren
52 ... Andy Pettitte
51 ... Jamie Moyer

moyer has 9 wins in 14 starts this year and is as effective today as he's ever been. in his last three starts, he's pitched 23 innings and allowed 5 earned runs

he's on pace to win 19 this year, which would put him at 277 going into 2011

if he stays healthy - granted a big if - he'll win 23 more games by 2012 and get to 300, and if he does, he's in

everybody who pitched in this century and won 290 games (and is eligible) is in

Pitching Wins is a stat that has nothing to do with how good a pitcher is. People get confused because it shares its name with another stat, but that's just because it is poorly named.

 

[Professor Snape]

Pitching Wins is a stat that has nothing to do with how good a pitcher is.

sure

 

[JC]

Pitching Wins is a stat that has nothing to do with how good a pitcher is.

sure

well reasoned response

 

[RickStain]

Pitching Wins is a stat that has nothing to do with how good a pitcher is.

sure

For a guy who died bleeding from the neck after a bit from a snake holding a piece of an evil wizard's soul and stuck inside a magic bubble, you sure do make a compelling case.

 

[Professor Snape]

hey, a statement like as silly as "Pitching Wins is a stat that has nothing to do with how good a pitcher is" doesn't deserve more than a whatever

that's a ridiculous statement and i assume you know that

 

[RickStain]

hey, a statement like as silly as "Pitching Wins is a stat that has nothing to do with how good a pitcher is" doesn't deserve more than a whatever

that's a ridiculous statement and i assume you know that

It's a bit hyperbolous, but it's simpler than saying "Pitching Wins is partially dependent on pitcher ability but has enough confounding factors as to be nearly useless, especially when more accurate measures are readily available:"