Among the many things that inspire vociferous debates of baseball - and there are many - resides the ever-present Hall of Fame talk. Who should go in, and who shouldn't. I've given my thoughts (here) on Mark McGwire, and now I'd like to delve into a few of the other popular candidates.
Firstly, Jack Morris. 44% of voters last year believed that Jack Morris belongs in the Hall of Fame. And he's got quite a fan club among non-baseball writers, too. He is acknowledged as a gamer, a man who could give you that win when you really needed it, and is considered a great postseason pitcher.
The problem? He's just not Hall of Fame quality. I've read various things about his candidacy and have never seen this essential fact: If Jack Morris gets elected to the Hall of Fame, he will have the highest ERA of any Hall of Fame pitcher. I'm not trying to disrespect him here - obviously, with 44% of voters voting for him, he was a really good, quality, effective pitcher. But if elected to the Hall of Fame, there's no doubt that Morris would be lowering the proverbial bar.
You don't like ERA? In terms of ERA+, if elected, Morris would have the third lowest - behind only Catfish Hunter and Rube Marquard. So he wouldn't be the worst in terms of that. But, I mean, you have to see what I'm getting at. He doesn't make the cut.
Maybe if you think about his all-time numbers, you'll get my point. Among all pitchers with at least 1,000 innings, Morris is ... tied for 469th in ERA+. In ERA (also with a minimum of 1,000 innings), he's 732nd. I'm not saying that Morris is the 732nd best pitcher in baseball history. Or the 469th. Don't get me wrong - close to 4,000 innings pitched with an ERA 5% above average is quite good. I just don't think it's worthy of the Hall of Fame.
No comments:
Post a Comment