User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
Buy MLB playoff tickets, plus 2011 World Series, 2011 ALCS tickets and NLCS game tickets. We also have Texas Rangers playoff schedule, tickets to Red Sox games and Yankees game tickets. Plus, buy Phillies baseball tickets, Tigers playoff tickets and the biggies like ALDS baseball tickets and 2011 NLDS tickets. |
Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats
|
AllianceTickets.com has cheap MLB Tickets. Get all your Colorado Rockies Tickets, Seattle Mariners Tickets, San Francisco Giants Tickets and all your favorite baseball tickets here. We also carry cheap Denver Broncos Tickets, Seattle Seahawks Tickets and Denver Nuggets Tickets. |
Page rendered in 2.3885 seconds
40 querie(s) executed
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
If you keep Hoffman out, it is easy.
If you put Hoffman in, then I think Lee belongs too.
Rivera is in a separate class, and would go in, even if you kept Hoffman and Lee out.
My HoM has four relivers, Smith is one.
While the definition of a HOF-worthy closer is still evolving, there is not a doubt in my mind that Franco is not one. As such, I have difficulty accepting Smith's career saves total as sufficient grounds for endorsing his HOF candidacy.
Now I'm not trying to be argumentative (and I'm certainly no Yankee fan), but I see absolutely no empirical evidence to support that position other than Hoffman's 72 advantage in career saves. But considering that Rivera is two years younger, it seems likely that they'll both finish with similar save totals.
I'm not a huge fan of Smith, but his career value is way above Hoffman's, and their peaks are similar. Given that Hoffman will sail into the Hall, and Sutter is already in, I think it's going to be difficult to justify excluding Smith.
One could justify the exclusion by saying that most of the reliever inductions were mistakes, and that relievers should not be judged differently from other pitchers, and thus Hoffman and Sutter are two mistakes among many within the population of HoF pitchers. But the Hall is an institution that makes its own standards, and it seems pretty clear to me that standards are being established for relief pitchers separate from starting pitchers, and thus Hoffman and Sutter will set the floor for induction - and Smith deserves it if they're the floor.
Sutter setting the floor for closers would be like saying Rizzuto should set the floor for shortstops. Sutter was a mistake from day 1, and I'm pretty confident that as time goes on it will be viewed more and more as a mistake. The fact that Doug Jones and Tom Henke and the like are already long off the ballot means that the voters already know that there wasn't a rational reason for including Sutter. Let's just leave it at that.
As for the Hoffman/Rivera debate, let's just say that I don't even have Hoffman rated as high as Wagner. IMHO, Rivera is clearly in, everyone else is iffy. I wouldn't get indigestion if Smith got in, as he's pretty clearly the most deserving reliever of his generation (not counting Eckersley's time as a starter), but I'm not sure that should be the benchmark to be judged by.
San Diego homerism? Just guessing here...
Let psychics pick the HoF!
Sutter: 1042 IP, 136 ERA+ ; 107/327, 123/229, 101/187, 102/149, 82/136 ('81)
Henke: 790 IP, 156 ERA+ ; 89/190, 94/181, 75/190, 91/127, 54/230 ('94)
Jones: 1128 IP, 139 ERA+: 112/180, 80/231, 83/181, 80/169, 104/129
Henke isn't even marginally comparable to Sutter. He has far less career value, even though Sutter's career totals are unimpressive. And Sutter's peak is clearly superior. Jones has similar career value and much less peak value.
Sutter was a mistake, I agree. But he is very easily distinguishable from Tom Henke and Doug Jones. He's harder to distinguish from Dan Quisenberry and Kent Tekulve. (Well, Tekulve has less peak but more career.)
Quiz: 1043 IP, 146 ERA+ ; 139/210, 129/175, 137/159, 129/153, 62/207 ('81)
Tekulve: 1436 IP, 132 ERA+ ; 99/227, 135/160, 110/153, 134/143, 103/141
edit: silly mistakes
Yeah, let's be clear ... the BBWAA may have set Sutter as the floor for HoF relievers, but they're not setting "1042 IP, 136 ERA+" as the floor. They're setting "good career, won a Cy Young, five top 10 MVP finishes, invented/revolutionized/popularized a pitch, held a season save record for awhile" as the floor.
I maintain that closers don't belong in the Hall at all, but given that some are in, you have to put in Rivera for sheer dominance. And as Dial will tell you, Billy Wagner might have a case for the same reason.
IMHO, lack of career value, lack of peak value. Limited and good, but not great, postseason. His enshrinement rests heavily on the splitter.
He has more in common with Dave Smith than Lee Smith.
Hoffman only has 3 or 4. He's going to be an awful selection.
I've said this elsewhere, but it's also TEH FEAR. Sutter is the pitching equivalent of Jim Rice - a sort of legend sprung up around him where the opposition supposedly wet their pants at the mere mention of his name.
As could about 100 other pitchers in history.
Maybe the stat guys need to play up Blyleven's 242 complete games as if they were "saves" and compare him to Eckersley.
Rivera's, meanwhile, are 21st, 24th and 43rd. These's just no way you can compare the two, except to point out how superior a pitcher Rivera is.
Considering how often a bullpen arm suddenly puts together a nightmare season, or just implodes for good, shouldn't his consistency (and longevity) be considered a bonus? After all, he's still sitting at a career ERA+ of 144, and has only been below an ERA+ of 130 on four occasions in his 16 years, and not every candidate for the Hall of Fame needs to be a peak candidate. Not that I'm really happy with the idea of adding more closers to the Hall....
I would think an ERA+ of over 130 isn't all that high above average for a closer.
not every candidate for the Hall of Fame needs to be a peak candidate.
I think that any relief pitcher candidate for the Hall should be a peak candidate. If you're a longevity guy and you've got less than a 1000 IP, you aren't really a HOFer.
Sweet. Thanks. So basically Hoffman's career is John Franco's with less IP and 7 more points of ERA+. Sounds like a HOFer to me! Is he coming back? Because if he does, that ERA+ is going to drop like a stone. If he doesn't, he's going to stay short of 1,000 IP.
I think I could name half a dozen Cub closers in my lifetime in whom I had more confidence to lock up games than Smith.
Just off the top of my head... Randy Myers, Rod Beck, Carlos Marmol... hell - I felt better with Chuck McElroy coming in with the game on the line.
Lord knows this is the wrong site to say someone does or does not "feel" like a Hall of Famer - but in no way, shape, or form did Lee Smith ever 'feel' like a Hall of Famer to me. With Sandberg, Sosa, or even Dawson - on occasion - I felt like I was watching an elite player of my lifetime.
But Smith?
Nope... and it wasn't even close.
Lee Smith looks a lot like Kent Tekulve and John Franco on that list. He's a borderline candidate and really should be thankful he's got 50% of the vote while Quiz got almost no support.
The only guys on the list with more IP than Hoffman and a better ERA+ are Rivera, Quiz and Wilhelm.
Smith's on the border. I think he does belong, largely because he got caught in the transition to 9th-inning closer, when teams weren't quite sure WHAT they wanted their ace reliever to do. If he had pitched exclusively in Gossage's era, I think his career would have looked a lot like Gossage's (albeit at a lower level); if he had pitched exclusively in the current era, I think his career would have been comparable to Hoffman's. As it is, his numbers are like something of a hybrid cross between the two, which kind of makes it tough to compare what he did to what Gossage or Hoffman did.
-- MWE
Sutter's career was short, and it was 1042. Quiz is at 1043. Lee Smith is way ahead, at 1289. Doug Jones came up earlier; he's at 1128. Jeff Reardon, 1132. John Franco, 1245. Real longevity you get to at Fingers, with 1700. For pitchers throwing 65 innings per year (Hoffman's average, throwing out his injury year), these are huge differences.
And a ton of those guys within 10 points of ERA+ are also running at significantly lower IP totals, or have yet to go through the decline phase, or have potential durability issues, and blah, blah, blah.... Basically, of the guys ahead of him, only three have more innings pitched - one of those is a Hofer, another will be, and a third should have been given a lot more consideration than he was. Of those below him, the only ones within 200 IP of him are Sutter (who is in the Hall) and Franco, who Cowboy Popup already addresses.
I'm not saying that I like the idea of Hoffman going in to the Hall of Fame (as I really don't like the idea), but it seems likely that it's going to happen, absent a major revision in how the BBWAA looks at relievers and the Hall of Fame (Saves, and not much else).
First, let me preface by saying that I'm not sold on Hoffman as a HOFer.
But he's head and shoulders above Sutter. What I said about Sutter is that he came up lacking in both peak and career value. While Hoffman clearly doesn't have a HOF-worthy peak, he possibly has a sufficient career value case.
Sutter, in my estimation, had 3 HOF-peak seasons, 5 good years, and 3 mediocre years. On the other hand, Hoffman has 1 HOF-peak season (1998), 10 good seasons, and 4 slightly above-average seasons. No forays into mediocrity quite yet. There's no question in my mind that Hoffman's career value case is better than Sutter's peak value case.
Smith has 1 HOF-peak season (1983), 9 good years, and 6 slightly-above average seasons with no poor seasons (I'm ignoring his 21.2 IP 1997). It's possibly that Smith accumulated more career value than Hoffman because he pitched quite a few more innings in the first third of his career, especially when comparing Smith's 1983 season to Hoffman's 1998.
If I had to cast a ballot today, I'd find both Hoffman and Smith coming up a bit short (but would vote for Rivera).
Hoffman has been good at holding leads, and that's a fair point, but it's also the kind of thing I'd like to see broken down more before I give him too much credit for it.
A 101 ERA+ in 45 IP isn't mediocre? That's his line in 2008.
I'll add on an unrelated note that Hoffman has sucked in big time, national stage moments and I find it baffling that a guy could have so many high profile choke jobs (two years ago to end the season, 98 World Series) could garner any support with such unexceptional numbers, except of course the Saves record.
Using WARP PRAR/PRAA Hoffman just passed Smith.
My recollections of late 80s - early 90s relievers were that Tom Henke was considered the premier "OMG TEH FEAR" guy, although Smith definitely had some of that too. Probably because they were both tall as hell and threw hard. Neither one should be a HOFer in my book, although I have fond memories of Henke.
Dial is wrong
Wagner may have an ERA+ of 180, but his ability to actually preserve leads is no greater than a raft of other closers hovering around the 130-150 ERA+ level. IOW Wagner is to closers what MWE thinks Blyleven is to starters.
Plus I doubt Billy even reaches 1000 ip
My recollections are the same, with the number two guy for "OMG TEH FEAR" being Duane Ward. Of course, my recollections are undoubtedly biased by my own fandom.
Hoffman is one of the few closers out there who is almost never used for multiple innings. Most closers will come into games in the eighth inning 6-8 times a year. Bochy has been one of the true believers in the "closer-pitches-one-inning" mantra.
Not hardly; it depends on how they are used. Hoffman has one of the lowest IP/games ratios going because Bochy WOULDN'T send him out for multiple innings, which makes it tougher for him to make up a bad outing.
Lead size doesn't seem to matter a whole lot, when it comes to closers; they don't tend to blow small leads significantly more often than they blow large ones.
-- MWE
Not that I doubt you specifically, but is there some real data on this, I'd be curious since it seems counterintuitive.
Another thing to break down would be evaluating the effect of pitching at Jack Murphy and Petco Park, both of which have been extreme pitchers' parks--particularly if we are discounting ERA+ as MWE suggests. His HR/BB/K rates are quite a bit better at home than away. I can't find career splits for blown saves, but it seems obvious that his chances of successfully converting save opportunities are helped by a pitcher-friendly scoring environment.
Well, then I guess it was unanimous - because Smith scared people rooting for the team he pitched for, too.
If Goose had pitched exclusively in Gossage's era, even I might have supported him for the HOF. ;-)
That's the manager's choice - not the pitcher's. It's not Hoffman's fault that Bochy wouldn't bring him in earlier.
I wrote this in the other thread:
-- MWE
You're aware that Wrigley was a huge hitter's park at the time, right? How many of these "heart attack" saves were in a 90 degree sunny afternoon with the wind blowing out 20 MPH to dead center? Considering the D that was often behind him, he starts to look pretty good. Compare his hit rate to closers with similar K levels and it's pretty obvious that his park was giving the opposition lots of extra hits.
Rivera & Eck (on peak) deserve to rate ahead of Smith largely (tho not wholly) due to their much better walk rates, but put Mariano in Wrigley in the 80's with Sarge Matthews, Larry Bowa/Shawon Dunston, and Keith Moreland behind him (and Ryne Sandberg too yes) and see if he can rattle of multiple sub 2.00 ERA seasons.
Well, it wasn't at Wrigley, but he did put up a 1.38 in 2005 with Jeter, Sheffield, Matsui and Bernie Williams in a DH league.
The other thing about that list is that it shows how close these relievers really are in this area; the blown save percentages don't vary much. Hoffman is #13 on your list; you have to go down to #87, Sasaki, before the difference between them would amount to 2 full saves in a season, given Hoffman's opportunities. The worst guy on this list, Minton, would only be 3.7 saves per season worse than Hoffman, pro-rating to Hoffman's opportunities.
(Note that I am certainly not saying that 3.7 saves per season are insignificant, although not all blown saves are losses. But that's the spread from near the top to near the bottom, which is pretty small. Within the range of plausible HOF candidates, which Greg Minton is not, the range is really tiny.)
EDIT: I see some of the comments above have addressed the first point I raised.
For reasons that MWE mentioned, an ERA+ in limited IP is a poor indicator. In Hoffman's case, his strikeout and walk rates were fine as were his save percentage (30 for 34) and WHIP; he just happened to give up 8 HR and had two really bad outings.
In fact, to illustrate what MWE was talking about, exclude Hoffman's 04/02/08 (4 ER in .2 IP) and 06/01/08 games (3 ER in .1 IP) and he winds with 12 ER in 44.1 IP. That's an ERA of 2.44, which works out to an ERA+ of about 155.
EDIT: Obviously, those 7 ER in 1 IP over two outings did occur. But that's why I consider 2008 to be one of his "slightly-above average" seasons for Hoffman, not a "good, not great" one (plus the low IP total).
The list I had before, with a couple of pitchers added and percentages of 9th-inning leads blown by location:
Player Leads Lost Home Lost PctAll PctHome PctAwayGagne, E 172 10 99 7 5.8% 7.1% 4.1%
Hiller, J 115 8 49 5 7.0% 10.2% 4.5%
Quisenberry, D 194 16 97 8 8.2% 8.2% 8.2%
Nathan, J 189 16 101 5 8.5% 5.0% 12.5%
Gossage, R 257 23 127 12 8.9% 9.4% 8.5%
Rivera, M 446 40 217 18 9.0% 8.3% 9.6%
Rodriguez, F 193 18 94 10 9.3% 10.6% 8.1%
Radatz, D 83 8 40 4 9.6% 10.0% 9.3%
Hoffman, T 507 51 281 23 10.1% 8.2% 12.4%
Miller, S 126 13 62 5 10.3% 8.1% 12.5%
Urbina, U 223 24 114 9 10.8% 7.9% 13.8%
McGraw, T 157 17 75 7 10.8% 9.3% 12.2%
Aker, J 98 11 51 5 11.2% 9.8% 12.8%
Wilhelm, H 178 20 76 8 11.2% 10.5% 11.8%
Face, R 124 14 48 5 11.3% 10.4% 11.8%
Beck, R 256 29 140 15 11.3% 10.7% 12.1%
Eckersley, D 375 43 189 21 11.5% 11.1% 11.8%
Wagner, B 384 45 197 26 11.7% 13.2% 10.2%
Thigpen, B 178 21 89 7 11.8% 7.9% 15.7%
Henneman, M 176 21 94 9 11.9% 9.6% 14.6%
Perranoski, R 133 16 66 5 12.0% 7.6% 16.4%
Percival, T 348 42 174 15 12.1% 8.6% 15.5%
Montgomery, J 280 34 128 14 12.1% 10.9% 13.2%
Henke, T 288 35 154 14 12.2% 9.1% 15.7%
Graves, D 178 22 85 15 12.4% 17.6% 7.5%
Abernathy, T 104 13 47 4 12.5% 8.5% 15.8%
Myers, R 302 38 152 12 12.6% 7.9% 17.3%
Lyle, S 173 22 89 11 12.7% 12.4% 13.1%
Harvey, B 156 20 83 10 12.8% 12.0% 13.7%
Sherry, L 69 9 24 4 13.0% 16.7% 11.1%
Fingers, R 298 39 135 13 13.1% 9.6% 16.0%
Nen, R 319 42 165 16 13.2% 9.7% 16.9%
Marshall, M 167 22 66 10 13.2% 15.2% 11.9%
Franco, J 393 52 221 31 13.2% 14.0% 12.2%
Smith, L 441 60 241 39 13.6% 16.2% 10.5%
Wetteland, J 308 44 156 23 14.3% 14.7% 13.8%
Reardon, J 327 47 175 24 14.4% 13.7% 15.1%
Koch, B 166 24 86 15 14.5% 17.4% 11.3%
Jones, D 262 38 136 27 14.5% 19.9% 8.7%
Williams, M 171 25 81 11 14.6% 13.6% 15.6%
Isringhausen, J 289 43 146 25 14.9% 17.1% 12.6%
Cordero, C 140 21 77 13 15.0% 16.9% 12.7%
Sutter, B 279 42 138 20 15.1% 14.5% 15.6%
Righetti, D 218 34 107 16 15.6% 15.0% 16.2%
Worrell, T 211 33 119 19 15.6% 16.0% 15.2%
Aguilera, R 306 48 151 25 15.7% 16.6% 14.8%
Giusti, D 109 18 55 11 16.5% 20.0% 13.0%
Regan, P 83 15 41 9 18.1% 22.0% 14.3%
McDaniel, L 138 25 57 8 18.1% 14.0% 21.0%
Linzy, F 98 18 46 6 18.4% 13.0% 23.1%
Hrabosky, A 76 14 37 9 18.4% 24.3% 12.8%
Wyatt, J 73 14 36 9 19.2% 25.0% 13.5%
Hoerner, J 67 13 34 6 19.4% 17.6% 21.2%
Lown, T 45 9 22 5 20.0% 22.7% 17.4%
Quisenberry had an exact 50/50 split; that amazes me.
Hoffman did do better at home, but then so did many others on this list. It's not clear that the park effect has a lot of do with this (look at KRod, for example).
-- MWE
Let me look at it a different way, if you have the data handy: what percent of leads of each size are blown?
Just off the top of my head... Randy Myers, Rod Beck, Carlos Marmol... hell - I felt better with Chuck McElroy coming in with the game on the line.
Beck? You're kidding, right?
TEH FEAR was from the devil's haircut.
He also had 6 losses which should balance out the good save rate.
exclude Hoffman's 04/02/08 (4 ER in .2 IP) and 06/01/08 games (3 ER in .1 IP) and he winds with 12 ER in 44.1 IP.
Why would I want to do that? He only threw 45 IP, taking out his worst inning is going to have a distorted effect on his overall line. Maybe his heavy sucking only took place in two games, but those were two games he flat out lost for the Padres. He blew a 2 and a 3 run lead (to the Giants of all teams) and lost his team the game in those outings, that's got to count for something.
But that's why I consider 2008 to be one of his "slightly-above average" seasons for Hoffman, not a "good, not great" one (plus the low IP total).
I know I'm picking nits at this point I would want the numbers in a 45 IP season to be good without shaving off a couple of bad outings before I called it above average. That innings total is absurdly low.
Little known fact. Fear of having to watch him close out games for the Cubs in 1998 is ultimately what gave Harry Caray the heart attack that killed him.
Player Leads Lost Home Lost PctAll PctHome PctAwayGagne, E 172 10 99 7 5.8% 7.1% 4.1%
Hiller, J 112 8 48 5 7.1% 10.4% 4.7%
Quisenberry, D 194 16 97 8 8.2% 8.2% 8.2%
Nathan, J 189 16 101 5 8.5% 5.0% 12.5%
Rivera, M 446 40 217 18 9.0% 8.3% 9.6%
Gossage, R 252 23 124 12 9.1% 9.7% 8.6%
Valverde, J 131 12 77 9 9.2% 11.7% 5.6%
Rodriguez, F 193 18 94 10 9.3% 10.6% 8.1%
Papelbon, J 112 11 57 5 9.8% 8.8% 10.9%
Lidge, B 170 17 95 12 10.0% 12.6% 6.7%
Hoffman, T 507 51 281 23 10.1% 8.2% 12.4%
Bedrosian, S 166 17 87 8 10.2% 9.2% 11.4%
Miller, S 123 13 60 5 10.6% 8.3% 12.7%
Wilhelm, H 168 18 75 8 10.7% 10.7% 10.8%
Wohlers, M 121 13 64 9 10.7% 14.1% 7.0%
Urbina, U 223 24 114 9 10.8% 7.9% 13.8%
Benitez, A 269 29 147 16 10.8% 10.9% 10.7%
Jones, T 306 33 158 18 10.8% 11.4% 10.1%
Jenks, B 111 12 47 5 10.8% 10.6% 10.9%
Farr, S 119 13 69 3 10.9% 4.3% 20.0%
McGraw, T 154 17 73 7 11.0% 9.6% 12.3%
Foulke, K 189 21 94 13 11.1% 13.8% 8.4%
Gordon, T 144 16 75 9 11.1% 12.0% 10.1%
Ryan, B 117 13 62 4 11.1% 6.5% 16.4%
Hernandez, W 108 12 51 7 11.1% 13.7% 8.8%
Stanley, B 125 14 63 8 11.2% 12.7% 9.7%
Carroll, C 107 12 46 3 11.2% 6.5% 14.8%
Face, R 124 14 48 5 11.3% 10.4% 11.8%
Beck, R 256 29 140 15 11.3% 10.7% 12.1%
Williams, Mike 131 15 70 7 11.5% 10.0% 13.1%
Smoltz, J 154 18 81 9 11.7% 11.1% 12.3%
Wagner, B 384 45 197 26 11.7% 13.2% 10.2%
Smith, D 179 21 97 10 11.7% 10.3% 13.4%
Fuentes, B 119 14 55 4 11.8% 7.3% 15.6%
Thigpen, B 178 21 89 7 11.8% 7.9% 15.7%
Henneman, M 176 21 94 9 11.9% 9.6% 14.6%
Olson, G 184 22 79 10 12.0% 12.7% 11.4%
Perranoski, R 133 16 66 5 12.0% 7.6% 16.4%
Percival, T 348 42 174 15 12.1% 8.6% 15.5%
Wickman, B 273 33 128 12 12.1% 9.4% 14.5%
Eckersley, D 347 42 177 21 12.1% 11.9% 12.4%
Montgomery, J 280 34 128 14 12.1% 10.9% 13.2%
Henke, T 288 35 154 14 12.2% 9.1% 15.7%
Graves, D 178 22 85 15 12.4% 17.6% 7.5%
Mesa, J 320 40 165 24 12.5% 14.5% 10.3%
Myers, R 302 38 152 12 12.6% 7.9% 17.3%
Lyle, S 173 22 89 11 12.7% 12.4% 13.1%
Harvey, B 156 20 83 10 12.8% 12.0% 13.7%
Abernathy, T 101 13 47 4 12.9% 8.5% 16.7%
McDowell, R 147 19 71 9 12.9% 12.7% 13.2%
Fingers, R 297 39 135 13 13.1% 9.6% 16.0%
Nen, R 319 42 165 16 13.2% 9.7% 16.9%
Franco, J 393 52 221 31 13.2% 14.0% 12.2%
Marshall, M 166 22 65 10 13.3% 15.4% 11.9%
Plesac, D 135 18 68 10 13.3% 14.7% 11.9%
Smith, L 441 60 241 39 13.6% 16.2% 10.5%
Rojas, M 117 16 56 7 13.7% 12.5% 14.8%
Guardado, E 195 27 96 9 13.8% 9.4% 18.2%
Campbell, B 101 14 50 4 13.9% 8.0% 19.6%
Tekulve, K 158 22 80 12 13.9% 15.0% 12.8%
Bottalico, R 113 16 60 12 14.2% 20.0% 7.5%
Wetteland, J 308 44 156 23 14.3% 14.7% 13.8%
Shaw, J 203 29 107 13 14.3% 12.1% 16.7%
Knowles, D 126 18 57 7 14.3% 12.3% 15.9%
Reardon, J 327 47 175 24 14.4% 13.7% 15.1%
Koch, B 166 24 86 15 14.5% 17.4% 11.3%
Jones, D 262 38 136 27 14.5% 19.9% 8.7%
Looper, B 103 15 52 7 14.6% 13.5% 15.7%
Williams, Mitch 171 25 81 11 14.6% 13.6% 15.6%
Jimenez, J 109 16 61 11 14.7% 18.0% 10.4%
Isringhausen, J 288 43 145 25 14.9% 17.2% 12.6%
Cordero, C 140 21 77 13 15.0% 16.9% 12.7%
Sutter, B 279 42 138 20 15.1% 14.5% 15.6%
Russell, J 159 24 79 8 15.1% 10.1% 20.0%
Howell, J 158 24 74 7 15.2% 9.5% 20.2%
Brewer, J 105 16 42 6 15.2% 14.3% 15.9%
Jackson, M 131 20 72 12 15.3% 16.7% 13.6%
Brantley, J 170 26 87 15 15.3% 17.2% 13.3%
Hernandez, R 320 49 167 23 15.3% 13.8% 17.0%
Alfonseca, A 135 21 74 8 15.6% 10.8% 21.3%
Worrell, T 211 33 119 19 15.6% 16.0% 15.2%
Cordero, F 198 31 105 12 15.7% 11.4% 20.4%
Borowski, J 134 21 68 12 15.7% 17.6% 13.6%
Aguilera, R 305 48 151 25 15.7% 16.6% 14.9%
Righetti, D 216 34 105 16 15.7% 15.2% 16.2%
Davis, R 100 16 44 3 16.0% 6.8% 23.2%
Sasaki, K 130 21 58 9 16.2% 15.5% 16.7%
Orosco, J 122 20 61 13 16.4% 21.3% 11.5%
Timlin, M 146 24 75 12 16.4% 16.0% 16.9%
Baez, D 127 22 69 12 17.3% 17.4% 17.2%
McDaniel, L 133 24 55 8 18.0% 14.5% 20.5%
Julio, J 107 20 55 7 18.7% 12.7% 25.0%
Garber, G 192 37 93 22 19.3% 23.7% 15.2%
Lavelle, G 122 24 58 13 19.7% 22.4% 17.2%
Street, H 100 20 47 12 20.0% 25.5% 15.1%
Minton, G 133 28 63 14 21.1% 22.2% 20.0%
-- MWE
W-L record is even less meaningful for closers than it is for starters. I totally ignore it when evaluating closers. For example, Lee Smith went 4-10 in 1983, which I consider to be his lone HOF-peak worthy season.
Anyway, for Hoffman in 2008, the two games that I cited resulted in losses. His other four losses came from 3 games when he gave up just 1 run and 1 game when he gave up 2 runs. His other 2 blown saves occurred after he gave up just 1 run as well.
Why would I want to do that?
I'm excluded his two bad outings only to illustrate how drastically ERA/ERA+ can swing based on just two outings.
I know I'm picking nits at this point I would want the numbers in a 45 IP season to be good without shaving off a couple of bad outings before I called it above average. That innings total is absurdly low.
Well since we're nitpicking over semantics at this point, please note that I termed it "slightly-above average" not "above-average."
Regardless of how one chooses to characterize this individual season, I think that my broader point still stands that Hoffman's 2008 is superior to Sutter's three "mediocre" seasons (1983, 1985, 1988) and comparable in value to any number of Lee Smith's "slightly-above average" seasons.
Came into this late, but saw this comment (by David Nieporent) and wondered what he would do with Hoyt Wilhelm, who did start 52 games but relieved in over 1,000, so is hardly an Eckersley-type hybrid. Imagine if Wilhelm's numbers, specifically IP, ERA+, and WHIP, were compiled by a starter. Below those stats are compared to a short-career HOF starting pitcher:
Wilhelm 2254.3 IP, 146 ERA+, 1.125 WHIP
HOF starter 2324.3 IP, 131 ERA+, 1.106 WHIP
Biggest difference is in ERA+, but they're really quite close. The SP's career began several years after Wilhelm's, and ended quite a few years sooner.
I can't speak for David, but considering we seem to be of similar minds on closers in the Hall (if any I'll grant Rivera for dominance, no thanks to the rest), I'll take a stab. Wilhelm is an acceptable HOFer, due to his innings and effectiveness.
You mentioned Sandberg below - and while Dernier wasn't as good as his '84 press, he was a pretty good CF for the season and a half before he lost his job. The Cubs also had a pretty good defensive caddy for Davis in Steve Lake for much of Smith's tenue.
You nailed it with the walk rates - I would also point you to Smith inordinately high number of WPs during his Cub tenure (34 in ~600 IP). I can't track down his GB/FB ratio - and while his HR rate wasn't awful, it certainly wasn't stellar either. Smith had a penchant for giving up those walks, those WPs, and those HRs at just the wrong time. Everyone remembers the Garvey HR - but few folks remember that the final out of game 2 was damn near a game-tying two-run shot, too.
Yes, yes - we were largely ignorant of advanced metrics in the 80s... and the flotsam that the Cubs dragged in after Smith before Randy Myers (The Cubs pen seemed to be where washed up closers went to die after Smith) wasn't fun.
But I don't know of many Cub fans that were sad to see him go when he got traded, even if they didn't like the return.
[EDIT: And I stand by Beck's work. His body of work wasn't pretty, but I still always felt he had things in hand]
They were booing the green snot-shards outta him by '89.
HOF starter 2324.3 IP, 131 ERA+, 1.106 WHIP
Wilhelm was a knuckleballer, and thus allowed a lot of unearned runs - about 18% of his career runs allowed were unearned, compared to a hair under 12% for "HOF Starter." If you make those fractions equal and do the math, Wilhelm ends up with a 135 ERA+, give or take, which is a lot closer to the other guy's.
That's not meant to dispute the larger point, which was that he's a very good Hall choice.
But everything about Hoffman's career is the manager's choice. If he'd been used in the 7th and 8th innings instead of the 9th, we wouldn't even be talking about him. If we're going to reward specific pitchers based on usage rather than effectiveness, no reason they shouldn't be punished for lack of usage as well.
So you're saying that I'm wasting my time with my "Timlin for the Hall of Fame" campaign?
Another way to look at this is by using LI rather than just lead size. LI takes into account not only lead size but also run environment. I'll post this as a Primate Studies thread because the table gets a little bit large and it's easier to align the columns when it's in the thread header.
-- MWE
I was at that game. Opening day 1988. Smith took the loss.
http://www.retrosheet.org/boxesetc/1988/B04040BOS1988.htm
They wouldn't have been so upset if they hadn't given up the great Calvin Schiraldi and Al Nipper to get him.
Agreed. I was just taken by how oddly close the numbers were, even closer than I thought thanks to Eric J's refinement. Maybe I was channeling Jayson Stark.
Sutter was a poor, poor choice, splitter or no.
'twas Bowa ... or at least certainly not Dunston who didn't debut until 1985.
"The good Lord wants the Cubs to win the pennant!"
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main