Last week CB40 sent around a bulleted list of sports points and complaints and one of the items ended up sparking a long e-mail firestorm. The bullet was:
Chris--WFAN CALLERS -- STOP IT! MIKE MUSSINA IS NOT A HALL OF FAMER!!!At first, I let this go. I don’t usually get in to Hall debates because of the stupid subjectivity. But, eventually I found the arguments against to be so bad I had to respond. Some of these writers you'll know. I'm not going to really identify any of them because I'm not entirely sure they want their names out there. I will note background info where I can. These will be unedited save for capitalization and spelling.
JustinMussina would be a Hall of Famer if he pitched three more seasons and reached the 300 win club.Chris B Maybe, but I even hate that Glavine is going in. Smoltz and Maddux were much better than he was. And, again, a guy like Schilling and Pedro deserve it for their short-term dominance, rather than these guys who just hung around long enough to compile without ever dominating.Mussina a compiler? Can you really call a guy who had one of the best seasons of his career in his last year a compiler? Still, not quite enough to get involved. Especially as some other list members made the points I was going to make.
PeterCiting
Mussina’s Wikipedia page.
Mussina's candidacy for the Hall of Fame has come under recent debate. "Do I compare to some guys who are in? I think I do," Mussina told USA Today in 2006. The only other pitchers to match Mussina's 17 seasons of 10 or more victories are Greg Maddux, Warren Spahn, Cy Young, Don Sutton and Steve Carlton; all are Hall of Famers except Maddux, who also retired after the 2008 season and thus is not yet eligible. Of the 23 eligible pitchers who have at least 265 wins and an ERA of 3.69 or less, 20 are in the Hall of Fame. Mussina's consistency is often overshadowed by the dominant peaks of contemporaries like Pedro MartÃnez and Randy Johnson. Baseball writer Tim Kurkjian stated on the August 3, 2008 edition of Baseball Tonight "He's a Hall of Famer. I've looked at the numbers and he's in."
He is the oldest pitcher to ever win 20 games in a season for the first time at the age of 39 in 2008. He never won the Cy Young Award, but finished in the top six of Cy Young voting eight times. Mussina also came tantalizingly close to pitching a perfect game and winning a World Series, having lost chances at achieving both in the 9th inning in 2001.
Only five pitchers in the history of major league baseball have as many victories as Mussina and a better winning percentage: Lefty Grove, Christy Mathewson, Grover Cleveland Alexander,Roger Clemens and Randy Johnson.GregThere may be a movement brewing where guys who were quiet and got the job done will gain votes vs. guys that chased home run records and stole headlines. If he doesn't get in on numbers, he may get in for being the right kind of guy for the voters in the years coming up. I say he gets in, but don't care that much except that I think he's one of the good guys and would be happy for him.At this point – it seemed like the debate would be friendly. Perhaps neutral and the Sports Musings group would come to the conclusion that he’s a pretty good pitcher and it could probably go either way. Until this point, I hadn’t even chimed in… I’d just been reading the opinions. But then, the godfather of the e-mail list chimed in. Chuck is the resident hardcore Yankee fan. Loves sports, loves predicting, and as we learned in Atlantic City, loves red wine.
Chuck Moose is not a Hall of Famer. Period. End of story. Actually, in my book, he isn't even close. He is the classic two or three starter that hung around a while and pitched on good teams. Also a terrible big game starter.And agreements started rolling in.
Chris B Chaz, I agree with you, 100%. Wow. ;-)JustinHe would have 300 wins if o's gave more run supportAnd only one disagreement
PeterHe also pitched in the best division in baseball his whole career and still amassed 270 wins and the 6th best winning % of any pitcher with that many wins. That’s impressive. I’m sorry. People can knock him all they want but not many pitchers can say they pitched as well for as long as he did.And this is where I finally had to join the fray. The talk about wins had become just too much.
Tom The "wins" stat is the most retarded hall of fame statistic ever. "Hey, let's use this stat which largely has nothing to do with pitching to figure out how good of a pitcher you were." If you insist on using them, though, 120 games over .500 is pretty ridiculously awesome.And thus arrived Coogan.
CooganIs it me or is he not as good as Bert Blyleven was? And BB isn't in ... ...
Interesting debate, though. Agree it could either way and I wouldn't be offended if he got in.To end part one, I'll present the e-mail that got myself and my friend Mike fully in to the debate. Remember: hardcore Yankee fan.
ChuckOk, I'll play this installment of why Mike Mussina is not a Hall of Famer:
- 0 rings.
- Carried a staff 2 times 1996 and 1997.
- 0 Cy Youngs.
- Limited All-Star appearances.
- Rarely even the third best guy on the staff.
- One good post season start in the ALDS vs the A's in 2001. He even sucked as an Oriole against the Yanks.
- Pitched well in relief against the Red Sox in 2003. But wasn't even the best pitcher in the game -- Rivera was.
- Played for teams with almost a 600 winning percentage and won 20 games once last season.
- Nibbled all the time.
- Was slow to the plate.
- Never took responsibility for letting the team down.
- Retired not because he didn’t want to play anymore or he couldn't but rather because he wasn't getting paid.
- Bolted the Os for more money.
- Held the Yanks hostage after the 2006 season.
In part two, Hulse and I dismantle the previous e-mail and former IP/411 writer Mark U joins the fray -- with the bad guys.
Posts
