Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Thursday, March 29, 2012

BPP: Does he belong in the Hall of Fame? Andy Pettitte

(cleans nestled Maypo lip crust) “Hell Gadamn Hall!” (buries head back in New York Courier and Enquirer)

Does he belong in the Hall of Fame?

...Pettitte could potentially be helped by two of the same effects that are enabling Jack Morris’s absurd Hall of Fame candidacy. Like Morris, Pettitte won more games than any other pitcher in a given decade (148 from 2000-2009), and like Morris, Pettitte made a name for himself in the playoffs. Pettitte’s stats are more impressive than Morris’s, and I would support Pettitte’s Hall of Fame bid long before I would consider supporting Morris’s, but I’m not sold on the arguments on which their candidacies hinge. As discussed earlier, wins are a product of the team as much as the pitcher, and a decade is nothing but a random period of time and shouldn’t be used to judge a career any more than a random 13-year stretch should. Postseason stats are even more dependent of team success, as in order to compile such numbers a player’s teammates need to be good enough to take him to the playoffs. No one should make the Hall of Fame because he got to the postseason more than his peers and pitched adequately once there.

So, with stats that seem short of the Cooperstown threshold and a case based on arguments I don’t buy, Andy Pettitte doesn’t get my hypothetical Hall of Fame vote, although I wouldn’t be too upset were he to be elected. The BBWAA’s treatment of starting pitchers is difficult to predict (as I’ve covered before, Jack Morris’s near induction contrasted with Kevin Brown’s immediate dismissal from the ballot is some sort of travesty), but I imagine the above “qualifications” will garner Pettitte some degree of support. Then again, irrationally vindictive writers might withhold their votes due to Pettitte’s admission of HGH use. Assuming the Yankees deem him a capable Major League starter, however, the lefty’s career appears not to be over. A successful comeback and a good season in 2012 and beyond could alter the Hall of Fame discussion. For now, Pettitte’s worthiness and likelihood of induction remain unclear.

Repoz Posted: March 29, 2012 at 06:04 AM | 177 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: astros, hall of fame, history, sabermetrics, yankees

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.

Page 1 of 2 pages  1 2 > 
   1. Rants Mulliniks Posted: March 29, 2012 at 09:45 AM (#4092131)
No.
   2. Rickey! On a blog from 1998. With the candlestick. Posted: March 29, 2012 at 09:46 AM (#4092133)
No.
   3. JJ1986 Posted: March 29, 2012 at 09:49 AM (#4092137)
Not while Mark McGwire gets 20% of the vote.
   4. Famous Original Joe C Posted: March 29, 2012 at 10:18 AM (#4092174)
No.
   5. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: March 29, 2012 at 10:30 AM (#4092193)
No.
   6. flournoy Posted: March 29, 2012 at 10:55 AM (#4092227)
No.
   7. DL from MN Posted: March 29, 2012 at 10:57 AM (#4092232)
No, but he's got a shot at the Hall of Merit. Billy Pierce is in and they're sort of comparable.
   8. zonk Posted: March 29, 2012 at 11:13 AM (#4092255)
No.
   9. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: March 29, 2012 at 11:14 AM (#4092256)
Of course Pettitte belongs in the Hall of Fame. The one in Yankee Stadium, not the one in Cooperstown.
   10. Heinie Mantush (Krusty) Posted: March 29, 2012 at 11:17 AM (#4092260)
Postseason stats are even more dependent of team success, as in order to compile such numbers a player’s teammates need to be good enough to take him to the playoffs. No one should make the Hall of Fame because he got to the postseason more than his peers and pitched adequately once there.


No, I don't think Pettitte *should* be a Hall of Famer, but this is absolute, utter, total and complete bullshit. Pettitte has made 42 postseason starts, compiling a 19-9 record with a 3.83 ERA in 263 IP. I'll assume Pettitte's postseason ERA+ is around his lifetime ERA+ of 117, though it could be a touch lower because there's less offense in the postseason. That's a full season on a four man rotation and more than an extra season of work under 5 man rotation conditions. Pettitte has 49.9 regular season WAR, and his postseason performance (probably around a 3-4 WAR season) makes a big difference when you're near the borderline.

The flip side of the author's statement is to penalize Pettitte for the extra mileage he incurred in October trying to achieve the game's ultimate prize. Players absolutely shouldn't be penalized for missing the postseason, but they also should be rewarded for good efforts in the postseason. To do otherwise is to effectively penalize them any possible negative consequences incurred during those high leverage (in some cases, ultra-high leverage) games. Pettitte is an outlier insofar as how big his postseason record is, but it cannot and should not be ignored.

I don't think Pettitte is a Hall of Famer even with his postseason record, but I think that Curt Schilling and John Smoltz moved comfortably into "safe" HOF territory when their spectacular postseason records are accounted for. I think there's something of a Jack Morris/Game 7 backlash going on here, and that's unfair. Morris and Pettitte aren't deserving Hall of Famers with their postseason records, but both move them closer to "in" than "out", and a player should be given every reasonable benefit in considering his playing career when then Hall of Fame is concerned.
   11. Sean Forman Posted: March 29, 2012 at 11:20 AM (#4092268)
#### No
   12. Rickey! On a blog from 1998. With the candlestick. Posted: March 29, 2012 at 11:27 AM (#4092277)
#### No


Sean really cares!
   13. zonk Posted: March 29, 2012 at 11:28 AM (#4092280)
And BTW -

While I fully recognize that Pettitte is a better by the numbers candidate than Morris, I think if you're a Keltner test HoF voter, I think Morris has a better case.

At the end of the day, right or wrong, even setting aside the then fledgling work that demonstrated he wasn't - I still think the CW from the 80s was that Morris was one of the AL's best pitchers in the 80s. He was the 'ace' - even if not always the best pitcher on the staff - on several very good teams, including a couple champs. Perception means a fair bit when it comes to the HoF -- I don't think it should mean too much (I wouldn't vote for Morris or Rice), but it does mean something.

From that strictly mythical POV -- I would say that Morris feels closer to a HoFer than Pettitte. Neither should be in, but if I had to put one in, I do think I'd put Morris in... even recognizing that Pettitte was actually a better pitcher.
   14. Fancy Pants Handles lap changes with class Posted: March 29, 2012 at 11:31 AM (#4092284)
Then again, irrationally vindictive writers might withhold their votes due to Pettitte’s admission of HGH use.

Ah, the 'everybody who does not share my view of things is crazy' argument. Always fun.
   15. Fancy Pants Handles lap changes with class Posted: March 29, 2012 at 11:34 AM (#4092285)
Players absolutely shouldn't be penalized for missing the postseason, but they also should be rewarded for good efforts in the postseason.

You realize those two statements are contradictory? If you reward good efforts in the postseason, you are automatically penalizing those that didn't get the opportunity.
   16. zonk Posted: March 29, 2012 at 11:36 AM (#4092290)
Ah, the 'everybody who does not share my view of things is crazy' argument. Always fun.


How else do you expect to be right 100% of the time?
   17. PhillyBooster Posted: March 29, 2012 at 11:39 AM (#4092296)
I think the really interesting question is whether he belongs in the "Hall Of T's In Your Last Name."

"Small Hall" advocates believe that the current inductees -- Mel, Ed, and Billy Ott, and Bill Tuttle -- are sufficient. "If you don't have more than half of your last name consisting of the letter T, then we have no interest. Besides, if you let Pettitte in, then you've got to open to doors to Dave Otto and an endless stream of Tates."

Pettitte supporters think that you really have to look at the absolute number of T's in the name. "Sure, Otto and Pettitte and both only half 'T', but Pettitte's name is twice as long!"

Small Hall supporters compare this argument to letting Jim Kaat into the Hall of Fame for his 283 wins. "Just because your name is twice as long, doesn't mean you get more credit for being just a .500 T-er."

Mickey Tettleton could not be reached for comment.
   18. Dog on the sidewalk Posted: March 29, 2012 at 11:42 AM (#4092300)
Ah, the 'everybody who does not share my view of things is crazy' argument. Always fun.

You're crazy.
   19. Rickey! On a blog from 1998. With the candlestick. Posted: March 29, 2012 at 11:48 AM (#4092307)
I think the really interesting question is whether he belongs in the "Hall Of T's In Your Last Name."


I would suggest that you build some sort of marketing tie-in for your Hall with Tom T. Hall.
   20. Danny Posted: March 29, 2012 at 11:56 AM (#4092316)
Then again, irrationally vindictive writers might withhold their votes due to Pettitte’s admission of HGH use.

Then again, more writers appear to be going the opposite route--praising him for admitting things he initially denied (while continuing to deny other things that he later admitted).
   21. Tuque Posted: March 29, 2012 at 12:10 PM (#4092330)
He's definitely in the Hall of Andys.

Andy Pettitte
Andy Rooney
Andy Kaufman
Andy Griffith
Andy Roddick
Andy Samberg
Andy Richter
Andie McDowell
Andy from Toy Story
Andy from Parks and Rec

It's not as exclusive as the Hall of Babes, but it's definitely tougher to get into than, say, the Hall of Freds or Johns.
   22. Ephus Posted: March 29, 2012 at 12:10 PM (#4092332)
Not as of now. If he were to win another 40 games (which assumes that he pitches effectively because otherwise the Yankees would not give him that many starts over 2 - 3 years), he would have a strong case if you took his stats at face value. Then the issue would be PEDs.

My guess is that he is off the ballot within two cycles.
   23. SoSH U at work Posted: March 29, 2012 at 12:14 PM (#4092343)
My guess is that he is off the ballot within two cycles.


Oddly enough, he's now back in the game because he's off cycle.

   24. Downtown Bookie Posted: March 29, 2012 at 12:21 PM (#4092354)
Then again, irrationally vindictive writers might withhold their votes due to Pettitte’s admission of HGH use.


Indeed; and that would be a true travesty. I mean, when the allegations first surfaced, Pettitte was very clear that he did not use HGH. Well, there was that one time. And really, he was only just trying to recover from injuries the two or three times that he used. I mean, seriously, if a player uses HGH only a half-dozen times or so just in an effort to recover and get back on the field, isn't that just exemplifying the true meaning of team spirit? Finally, you really have to allow that Pettitte will have no problem coming totally clean about the ten to fifteen times that he's used HGH. It really would be vidictive of the writers to withhold their HOF votes from Pettitte for no other reason than the twenty or thirty times that he used HGH.

DB
   25. PhillyBooster Posted: March 29, 2012 at 12:23 PM (#4092355)
He's definitely in the Hall of Andys.

Andy Pettitte



AND Your Bird Can Sing, Beatles
A&E Network
hAN DYnasty
   26. Edmundo got dem ol' Kozma blues again mama Posted: March 29, 2012 at 12:35 PM (#4092361)
Hall of Andys:
(Liquid) Handy Andy (outcleans them all, cleans anything, anywhere, won't hummina, hummina, )


I can't find any reference to Handy Andy except for South Africa, Australia and NZ. I assume it disappeared in the states decades ago. Oh how those jingles from my childhood are burned into my brain.

And, Pettitte, nah, but I could be persuaded if he has a couple of remarkable years. I think the HOF discussion around him may force the ain't-votin'-for-no-steroid-user** media to take a harder stance on his PEDs.

** And by user we mean named users and obvious suspects.
   27. Misirlou's been working for the drug squad Posted: March 29, 2012 at 01:11 PM (#4092395)
Andy from Parks and Rec


"You know what my favorite food is? I take a skittles and put it between 2 starbursts. Know what I call it?"

"Skittle sandwich?"

"No, but that's pretty good. I call it Andy's Mouth Surprise."
   28. zonk Posted: March 29, 2012 at 01:18 PM (#4092401)
I can't find any reference to Handy Andy except for South Africa, Australia and NZ. I assume it disappeared in the states decades ago. Oh how those jingles from my childhood are burned into my brain.


With Handy Andy, you've got it made...

Am I remembering that right?
   29. vortex of dissipation Posted: March 29, 2012 at 01:25 PM (#4092407)
Andy Pettitte
Andy Rooney
Andy Kaufman
Andy Griffith
Andy Roddick
Andy Samberg
Andy Richter
Andie McDowell
Andy from Toy Story
Andy from Parks and Rec


Andy Partridge
   30. My name is Votto, and I love to get blotto Posted: March 29, 2012 at 01:31 PM (#4092410)
Andy from Parks and Rec


"Reverse psychiatry"
   31. Edmundo got dem ol' Kozma blues again mama Posted: March 29, 2012 at 01:33 PM (#4092412)
zonk, I thought the end was something like "Handy Andy, you're my boy" but I could be completely off. But I remember the tune, that's for sure.

Andy Gibb
Andy Dufresne
   32. Bob Evans Posted: March 29, 2012 at 01:36 PM (#4092416)
You guys are way to big Andy-Hall guys.
   33. Jason Michael(s) Bourn Identity Crisis Posted: March 29, 2012 at 01:46 PM (#4092421)
And another "no."
   34. RMc's desperate, often sordid world Posted: March 29, 2012 at 01:46 PM (#4092422)
   35. Jacob Posted: March 29, 2012 at 02:10 PM (#4092447)
Players absolutely shouldn't be penalized for missing the postseason, but they also should be rewarded for good efforts in the postseason.

You realize those two statements are contradictory? If you reward good efforts in the postseason, you are automatically penalizing those that didn't get the opportunity.


I disagree. Good postseason performance is like "extra credit".
   36. Blubaldo Jimenez (OMJ) Posted: March 29, 2012 at 02:11 PM (#4092448)
You realize those two statements are contradictory? If you reward good efforts in the postseason, you are automatically penalizing those that didn't get the opportunity.


I don't think that is true at all. If you give a player credit for having a good 18 year career, are you penalizing players that had a good 16 year career? By this logic we should evaluate all hall candidates based on their best ten years (that being the minimum criteria). I think we should credit based on the overall statistical view of the post season. In other words, give player X credit for XXX/XXX/XXX overall postseason stats (the quality of play is very high after all) but don't give player Y credit for what he did in "Game 7."
   37. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: March 29, 2012 at 02:13 PM (#4092450)
"You know what my favorite food is? I take a skittles and put it between 2 starbursts. Know what I call it?"

"Skittle sandwich?"

"No, but that's pretty good. I call it Andy's Mouth Surprise."
I typed your symptoms into this thing here and it says you have network connectivity problems.
   38. Tuque Posted: March 29, 2012 at 02:46 PM (#4092457)
The band has had a few different names over the years. When we started we were Teddy Bear Suicide. But then we changed it to Mouse Rat. Then we were God Hates Figs; Department of Homeland Obscurity; Flames for Flames; Muscle Confusion; Nothing Rhymes With Orange; then Everything Rhymes With Orange; Punch Face Champions; Rad Wagon; Puppy Pendulum; Possum Pendulum; Penis Pendulum; Handrail Suicide; Angel Snack; Just the Tip; Threeskin; Jet Black Pope; we went back to Mouse Rat and now we are Scarecrow Boat. God when I hear myself say "Scarecrow Boat" out loud I kind of hate it.
   39. Karl from NY Posted: March 29, 2012 at 02:53 PM (#4092460)
I'll assume Pettitte's postseason ERA+ is around his lifetime ERA+ of 117, though it could be a touch lower because there's less offense in the postseason.

Does that logic hold? There's less offense in the postseason, because playing time (PA) skews towards better pitchers more than it does towards better hitters, because you can shorten the rotation and bullpen but you've still got the same 8-9 guys hitting. Pettitte only appears to be pitching in a lower offense environment because of the other pitchers, which have no effect when Pettitte himself is on the mound. IOW, any particular pitcher does not experience a lower offense environment in the postseason, because he's still facing the same hitters. So I think postseason ERA+ should indeed be figured relative to league regular season ERA.
   40. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: March 29, 2012 at 03:47 PM (#4092482)
I think the really interesting question is whether he belongs in the "Hall Of T's In Your Last Name."

"Small Hall" advocates believe that the current inductees -- Mel, Ed, and Billy Ott, and Bill Tuttle -- are sufficient. "If you don't have more than half of your last name consisting of the letter T, then we have no interest. Besides, if you let Pettitte in, then you've got to open to doors to Dave Otto and an endless stream of Tates."

Pettitte supporters think that you really have to look at the absolute number of T's in the name. "Sure, Otto and Pettitte and both only half 'T', but Pettitte's name is twice as long!"


He's very peaky, but no candidate can beat his rate stats.
   41. JPWF1313 Posted: March 29, 2012 at 03:53 PM (#4092484)
IOW, any particular pitcher does not experience a lower offense environment in the postseason, because he's still facing the same hitters. So I think postseason ERA+ should indeed be figured relative to league regular season ERA.


well no, he's not facing the same hitters, he's only facing the hitters on playoff teams which will on average be the better hitting teams.
   42. The Yankee Clapper Posted: March 29, 2012 at 04:09 PM (#4092491)
Every pitcher 100 wins over .500 is in the Hall. That plus the postseason is probably enough for Pettitte. Of course 2012 (and beyond) could affect that a bit, either way.
   43. Booey Posted: March 29, 2012 at 04:30 PM (#4092506)
Then again, more writers appear to be going the opposite route--praising him for admitting things he initially denied (while continuing to deny other things that he later admitted).

Yeah, which seems weird since doing the same thing didn't affect McGwire's vote totals at all (they actually dropped slightly).

Actually, voters being inconsistent isn't weird at all. It's pretty typical. Nevermind.

Oh, and Pettitte isn't a HOFer, even with the personal bonus points he gets for having the same name as one of my best friend's younger brother (though they spell their last name Pettet).
   44. Booey Posted: March 29, 2012 at 04:34 PM (#4092507)
And speaking of Andy's, my sister and I always complain to each other about all the really dumb, trendy, "original" names we hear parents naming their kids these days, and she knows a couple that says they're going to name their next son &rew;. They already have fraternal twins named Br&on; and Am&a.

This should count as child abuse.
   45. Dave Spiwak Posted: March 29, 2012 at 07:28 PM (#4092618)
Br&on;

Is that pronounced Brampersandon, or is there another way to say it?
   46. RJ in TO Posted: March 29, 2012 at 07:58 PM (#4092628)
Is that pronounced Brampersandon, or is there another way to say it?


It's pronounced "Son of ##########\"
   47. Tippecanoe Posted: March 29, 2012 at 09:30 PM (#4092658)
Br&on; and Am&a


This all started when we had Secretary of State : Powell
   48. Heinie Mantush (Krusty) Posted: March 29, 2012 at 09:37 PM (#4092661)

You realize those two statements are contradictory? If you reward good efforts in the postseason, you are automatically penalizing those that didn't get the opportunity.


Seconding 35/Jacob & 36/Old Man James in response. It's really a form of extra credit.
   49. Never Give an Inge (Dave) Posted: March 29, 2012 at 09:37 PM (#4092662)

If Pettitte pitches into his mid-40s and approaches 300 wins, he's not making the HOF, and it won't be close. David Cone, a superior pitcher who won a Cy Young Award and pitched a perfect game, was one-and-done. Pettittee has the gaudier win total, but that's it.
   50. Tippecanoe Posted: March 29, 2012 at 09:50 PM (#4092664)
David Cone didn't get any support because he had fewer than 200 wins, simple as that. I don't think it has anything to do with Pettitte.

I wouldn't support him, but if he goes over 250 wins he could be the Jack Morris of the year 2031, assuming the PEDs thing dies out a bit by then.
   51. Never Give an Inge (Dave) Posted: March 29, 2012 at 10:21 PM (#4092671)

I wouldn't support him, but if he goes over 250 wins he could be the Jack Morris of the year 2031, assuming the PEDs thing dies out a bit by then.


He could be, but Jack Morris hasn't made the HOF yet, and unlike Morris, nobody is going to argue that Pettitte was the best pitcher of his era. There are just too many other candidates who were obviously better. Morris also never admitting to HGH use.

Mussina is the obvious comp for Pettitte, but better in every respect except when it comes to World Series rings. And Mussina will struggle to get in. Pettitte could go in, but I think it's pretty unlikely unless he adds significant wins and value over the next few years.
   52. bjhanke Posted: March 29, 2012 at 10:28 PM (#4092672)
Naw. Child abuse is when your last name is "Hogg" and you name your children Ima and Ura. This actually happened, some decades ago, unless there was a hoax involved. I think the father (Boss Hogg?) was governor of Texas or something, so the story stayed on the news for a couple of weeks instead of a couple of days.. - Brock Hanke
   53. Misirlou's been working for the drug squad Posted: March 29, 2012 at 10:37 PM (#4092675)
Naw. Child abuse is when your last name is "Hogg" and you name your children Ima and Ura. This actually happened, some decades ago, unless there was a hoax involved. I think the father (Boss Hogg?) was governor of Texas or something, so the story stayed on the news for a couple of weeks instead of a couple of days.. - Brock Hanke


My last name is 3 syllables and rhymes with Anita. My wife and I thought about 2 seconds on that when we knew our second was a girl.

edit: And I new a guy in the Air Force who went to the University of Arkansas, and named his son Ray Zorback [last name]
   54. michaelplank has knowledgeable eyes Posted: March 29, 2012 at 10:49 PM (#4092677)
Andy Pettitte
Andy Rooney
Andy Kaufman
Andy Griffith
Andy Roddick
Andy Samberg
Andy Richter
Andie McDowell
Andy from Toy Story
Andy from Parks and Rec


Horace Andy.
   55. Swoboda is freedom Posted: March 29, 2012 at 11:02 PM (#4092682)
Andy Pettitte
Andy Rooney
Andy Kaufman
Andy Griffith
Andy Roddick
Andy Samberg
Andy Richter
Andie McDowell
Andy from Toy Story
Andy from Parks and Rec


Andy Warhol
Andy Hardy
Randy Andy
Andy Whifield
Amos and Andy
Raggedy Andy
   56. Ray (RDP) Posted: March 29, 2012 at 11:24 PM (#4092689)
Basically:

1. Pettitte is short of the Hall because his peak wasn't good enough and/or his career isn't long enough. (Duh. But my point is that his career is very good -- just not great.) I don't see him turning in another few high peak seasons, so his more likely path to the HOF is another 1000 effective innings. That's unlikely to happen.

2. Of course postseason performance is utterly irrelevant. It was an accident of the Yankees that he pitched all of those postseason innings. He helped get them there, of course, but Roy Halladay did everything he could for the Jays and didn't pitch a postseason inning for them.

3. Does anyone here care -- I mean, really care -- that Pettitte used HGH? Forget about the issue of him lying about it. Do you really care he used it? (And by "care" I mean "disqualify him for the Hall of Fame.") Anyone? I presume there are some. Andy, for one. Maybe MCOA. Maybe some others.
   57. Fancy Pants Handles lap changes with class Posted: March 29, 2012 at 11:33 PM (#4092692)
Seconding 35/Jacob & 36/Old Man James in response. It's really a form of extra credit.

Yes, you are giving some guys extra credit. Extra credit that other players never had the opportunity to earn. How is that not putting them at a disadvantage?

Mind you, I am not saying it is wrong to award extra credit for postseason performance, since not giving extra credit is also unfair. Just that by doing so you are in fact disadvantages those who didn't have equal opportunity to get their credit.

I don't think that is true at all. If you give a player credit for having a good 18 year career, are you penalizing players that had a good 16 year career?

Did the 16 year guy not have the opportunity to play for 18 years? Was he in a war, being segregated out of the majors, killed in a freak gasoline fight accident? Then yes, he is being disadvantaged. Otherwise, if he had the same opportunity to put up 18 years, then no.
   58. Best Dressed Chicken in Town Posted: March 30, 2012 at 12:16 AM (#4092708)
Of course postseason performance is utterly irrelevant.

Stop being so ###### Diperna.
   59.   Posted: March 30, 2012 at 12:20 AM (#4092712)

Did the 16 year guy not have the opportunity to play for 18 years? Was he in a war, being segregated out of the majors, killed in a freak gasoline fight accident? Then yes, he is being disadvantaged. Otherwise, if he had the same opportunity to put up 18 years, then no.


Why is "body broke down" not a random, uncontrollable thing like being in a war is?
   60. DanG Posted: March 30, 2012 at 02:50 AM (#4092736)
Pettitte and a dozen comps.

Rk           Player  WAR ERA+     IP From   To  CG SHO   W   L
1        David Cone 57.5  121 2898.2 1986 2003  56  22 194 126
2     Larry Jackson 55.6  113 3262.2 1955 1968 149  37 194 183
3      Chuck Finley 55.0  115 3197.1 1986 2002  63  15 200 173
4      Billy Pierce 53.5  119 3306.2 1945 1964 193  38 211 169
5        Dave Stieb 53.0  123 2895.1 1979 1998 103  30 176 137
6    Orel Hershiser 51.5  112 3130.1 1983 2000  68  25 204 150
'7    Andy Pettitte 49.9  117 3055.1 1995 2010  25   4 240 138'
8     Dwight Gooden 47.6  111 2800.2 1984 2000  68  24 194 112
9      Steve Rogers 45.8  116 2837.2 1973 1985 129  37 158 152
10    Dutch Leonard 45.6  119 3218.1 1933 1953 192  30 191 181
11      Frank Viola 43.9  112 2836.1 1982 1996  74  16 176 150
12     Curt Simmons 42.6  111 3348.1 1947 1967 163  36 193 183
13        Bob Lemon 42.4  119 2850.0 1946 1958 188  31 207 128 
   61. OCF Posted: March 30, 2012 at 03:15 AM (#4092740)
Naw. Child abuse is when your last name is "Hogg" and you name your children Ima and Ura. This actually happened, some decades ago, unless there was a hoax involved. I think the father (Boss Hogg?) was governor of Texas or something, so the story stayed on the news for a couple of weeks instead of a couple of days.. - Brock Hanke

Ima Hogg never married and lived into her 90's as one of the best-known members of Houston high society. Her home in the River Oaks neighborhood of Houston is now an art museum.

But she never had a sister named "Ura." She had no sisters as all. That was just a snarky legend.

And the governor was "Big Jim" Hogg, not "Boss" Hogg; the latter was the name of TV character.
   62. bjhanke Posted: March 30, 2012 at 04:02 AM (#4092742)
OCF - Thanks for the info. All I really remembered was that this was a 9-day wonder of TV news when I was a kid. I'm actually glad to find out that it wasn't wholly a hoax, and I will also admit to being happy that Ima had a (financially and socially, at least) comfortable life. And yes, "Boss" Hogg was a joke. I'm well old enough to remember The Dukes of Hazard.

And DanG - That's an informative list there. Comparing Pierce, who has been mentioned, to David Cone: Billy has an ERA+ of 119 to David's 121, but he also has 400 more IP than Cone. Over in the HoM, David Cone is a very controversial player, still not in, but still getting serious votes. Pierce is often mentioned as one of the weakest of HoM's pitchers. This implies that the HoM thinks that 400 IP is worth more than 2 WAR. I agree with this, but that's not the point. Pettite has, as of now, a lower IP than Pierce and a lower ERA+ than Cone OR Pierce. and. also, fewer WAR than either. Unless Andy puts up two or three really outstanding years - better than his career average, he can't match them. I give postseason credit, but only to players, like Eddie Collins, who REALLY dominated. Pettite has a lot of postseason volume, but the record isn't outstanding enough for me to give him any credit.

It might be worth noting that Larry Jackson has fewer IP than Pierce and also a (significantly) lower ERA+, but still has more WAR. So there's something in WAR that isn't just IP and ERA+. Might be offense; I have vague memories of Jackson from my childhood, and they include that he hit a bit better than most pitchers do. Or maybe he pitched in front of worse defenses. I don't know. I do know that Bob Lemon has about the same IP and ERA+ as Cone, and was a MUCH better hitter, but still has a LOT fewer WAR. Maybe it's an adjustment for those Cleveland defenses, which were pretty good there in the 1950s. Again, I don't know. The list brings out several such oddities.

- Brock
   63. Ron J Posted: March 30, 2012 at 07:37 AM (#4092758)
#62 Brock, Sean sees Pierce as having played in front of generally good defensive teams (not controversial I would think), while Jackson on balance got basically league average defensive support.

Sean gets the difference at 61 runs. Minor difference in leverage (1.1 for Jackson, 1.0 for Pierce)

Of course at a career level there's no actual difference between a WAR of 53.5 and 55.6. Or to be more precise the difference is comfortably within method error. And since Pierce was a less terrible hitter (OPS+ of 19 to Jackson's 5, and way more sacs -- a good thing when you're talking that level of "hitter") it's perfectly rational to have Pierce a bit ahead.

Sean works with runs rather than earned runs and adjusts for the general quality of defense (which is why Jim Palmer ranks as low as he does and Rick Reuschel ranks #30.
   64. cercopithecus aethiops Posted: March 30, 2012 at 08:23 AM (#4092769)
Like Morris, Pettitte won more games than any other pitcher in a given decade (148 from 2000-2009), and like Morris, Pettitte made a name for himself in the playoffs.


Somebody really needs to step up and push the Morris/Pettitte comparison down the throats of all the Morris supporters before it's too late.
   65. Blubaldo Jimenez (OMJ) Posted: March 30, 2012 at 08:49 AM (#4092776)
Did the 16 year guy not have the opportunity to play for 18 years? Was he in a war, being segregated out of the majors, killed in a freak gasoline fight accident? Then yes, he is being disadvantaged. Otherwise, if he had the same opportunity to put up 18 years, then no.


Maybe the 16 year guy didn't play 18 years because he accrued 2 years of wear and tear playing in the playoffs. Why are you penalizing him while rewarding the player that was not forced to play these extra innings?
   66. Howie Menckel Posted: March 30, 2012 at 08:58 AM (#4092780)

"Over in the HoM, David Cone is a very controversial player, still not in, but still getting serious votes."

Actually we elected Cone in the 2012 results 3 months ago. He was the 3rd of 3 electees in a backlog election, so yes, chosen with little passion. Someone had to fill the slot, but I suspect few voters would stump for him for the Hall of Fame.
   67. Steve Parris, Je t'aime Posted: March 30, 2012 at 09:03 AM (#4092782)
Yes, you are giving some guys extra credit. Extra credit that other players never had the opportunity to earn. How is that not putting them at a disadvantage?

Mind you, I am not saying it is wrong to award extra credit for postseason performance, since not giving extra credit is also unfair. Just that by doing so you are in fact disadvantages those who didn't have equal opportunity to get their credit.

By the same token, it's unfair to deprive Pettite credit for actual innings he threw. Pitchers don't have an unlimited number of miles. It's at least arguable that his 263 postseason innings shortened his regular season career. EDIT: pretty much what [65] said.
   68. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: March 30, 2012 at 09:39 AM (#4092802)
Pettitte and a dozen comps.


Rk Player WAR ERA+ IP From To CG SHO W L
1 David Cone 57.5 121 2898.2 1986 2003 56 22 194 126
2 Larry Jackson 55.6 113 3262.2 1955 1968 149 37 194 183
3 Chuck Finley 55.0 115 3197.1 1986 2002 63 15 200 173
4 Billy Pierce 53.5 119 3306.2 1945 1964 193 38 211 169
5 Dave Stieb 53.0 123 2895.1 1979 1998 103 30 176 137
6 Orel Hershiser 51.5 112 3130.1 1983 2000 68 25 204 150
'7 Andy Pettitte 49.9 117 3055.1 1995 2010 25 4 240 138'
8 Dwight Gooden 47.6 111 2800.2 1984 2000 68 24 194 112
9 Steve Rogers 45.8 116 2837.2 1973 1985 129 37 158 152
10 Dutch Leonard 45.6 119 3218.1 1933 1953 192 30 191 181
11 Frank Viola 43.9 112 2836.1 1982 1996 74 16 176 150
12 Curt Simmons 42.6 111 3348.1 1947 1967 163 36 193 183
13 Bob Lemon 42.4 119 2850.0 1946 1958 188 31 207 128


I think that's a great set of comps.

Pettitte fits perfectly in the Cone/Stieb/Finley/Gooden/Hershiser family of modern pitchers. Shouldn't really be in the HoF (barring another 3 productive seasons from Pettitte), but wouldn't bother me one bit if they were.

It wouldn't surprise me to see a future VC install some or all of those guys in the Hall. The standards for SPs have gotten crazy high.
   69. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: March 30, 2012 at 09:48 AM (#4092807)
Does anyone here care -- I mean, really care -- that Pettitte used HGH?


Well, he's trying to get in on career longevity, so the HGH use at least has to come up within that context.
   70. DanG Posted: March 30, 2012 at 10:06 AM (#4092823)
I should mention the parameters of the comparison list: Starting pitchers in the past 100 years within 9 Pitching WAR, 6 ERA+, and 370 IP of Pettitte.

Since Bob Lemon is the only HOFer on the list it's worth comparing him to Pettitte. As a converted 3B he was a "great-hitting" pitcher. Lemon's overall WAR exceeds Pettitte 51.0 to 49.4. And that was under a schedule 5% shorter. Of course, it was also in a barely-integrated league. Bob Lemon was a perennial all-star and top-10 MVP finisher. Pettitte was an occasional all-star, never top-10 MVP, one time made noise in CYA voting.

Also, it should be pointed out that Pettitte benefited from great bullpen support, which I don't believe is reflected in WAR. It helped boost his W-L% record to dizzying heights. He has 240 wins and only 4 shutouts.

Pitchers with most wins with Wins > 40*ShutOuts

Rk           Player   W   L W-LSHO From   To
1     Andy Pettitte 240 138 .635   4 1995 2010
2        Derek Lowe 166 146 .532   3 1997 2011
3    Lindy McDaniel 141 119 .542   2 1955 1975
4    Woody Williams 132 116 .532   2 1993 2007
5       Kirk Rueter 130  92 .586   1 1993 2005 
   71. Booey Posted: March 30, 2012 at 11:10 AM (#4092897)
Why is "body broke down" not a random, uncontrollable thing like being in a war is?

Well, from my POV at least, it's because injuries/aging/body breaking down happens to everyone at some point.

War service and segregation are specific era related obstacles that players from some other era's didn't have to deal with.
   72. Booey Posted: March 30, 2012 at 11:12 AM (#4092900)
Br&on;

Is that pronounced Brampersandon, or is there another way to say it?


Might as well be. Spelling the name Brandon this way is just as stupid.
   73. DL from MN Posted: March 30, 2012 at 11:43 AM (#4092935)
Chuck Finley is a great comp. Pettitte is essentially Chuck Finley with rings.
   74. Heinie Mantush (Krusty) Posted: March 30, 2012 at 01:04 PM (#4092993)

Yes, you are giving some guys extra credit. Extra credit that other players never had the opportunity to earn. How is that not putting them at a disadvantage?

Mind you, I am not saying it is wrong to award extra credit for postseason performance, since not giving extra credit is also unfair. Just that by doing so you are in fact disadvantages those who didn't have equal opportunity to get their credit.


I suppose one could see it that way, but 65/Old Man James and 67/Steve Parris took the words out of my mouth again. The most equitable thing to do here is to reward the playoff player. Of course there's *some* disadvantage to not being able to compile extra credit in this case, but it's overshadowed by the inequity of denying postseason records.

The much, much, much harder question for me is how much to dock a borderline player who genuinely sucked in a sufficiently large playoff sample. Granted, you won't find as many of these guys, but I'd have a much harder time saying "you played your way out of the Hall" to someone than "congrats! You played your way in", even though that would only seem fair.

Again, we come back to the idea of extra credit, but I guess I'm giving away that I'm a (relatively) big Hall guy.
   75. OsunaSakata Posted: March 30, 2012 at 01:07 PM (#4092997)
Br&on; and Am&a


This all started when we had Secretary of State : Powell


P@ Gillick
Ezra #
* Jones
/
Waltzing Ma~
-iell Hammett
   76. Ray (RDP) Posted: March 30, 2012 at 01:33 PM (#4093023)
By the same token, it's unfair to deprive Pettite credit for actual innings he threw. Pitchers don't have an unlimited number of miles. It's at least arguable that his 263 postseason innings shortened his regular season career.


How can I put this. I don't care. The argument is completely speculative. Yes, pitching leads to injuries. No, you haven't the foggiest clue whether the extra 263 innings spread out over 16 years did a damned to Pettitte's arm. An extra 17 innings a year, on average? Woo.

And I _never_ see you people dock a guy for poor postseason play. Never. Ever. Ev-ah.
   77. Pasta-diving Jeter (jmac66) Posted: March 30, 2012 at 01:38 PM (#4093028)
I'm non+ed
   78. PreservedFish Posted: March 30, 2012 at 01:43 PM (#4093036)
Re #76 - that's why extra credit is a good analogy.
   79. DL from MN Posted: March 30, 2012 at 01:51 PM (#4093042)
It certainly makes arguing that Pettitte didn't put up enough in-season innings less compelling. Teams save their starters for the longer playoffs by working them less down the stretch if they have the option. Nobody plays the game to produce the most in-season WAR. Giving credit for postseason play acknowledges reality.
   80. bjhanke Posted: March 30, 2012 at 01:56 PM (#4093049)
Dan G (#70) -

Well, that sure helped a lot. I didn't pick up that the list was using only pitching WAR, and that pitching WAR includes unearned runs. And yes, Bob Lemon pitched in by far the inferior league at the time, because almost all the black superstars were in the NL. Somehow, I forgot that we actually elected Cone. I got so much trouble for a couple of comments I made that his election passed me by. I'll try to remember that one. - Brock
   81. Tippecanoe Posted: March 30, 2012 at 02:00 PM (#4093051)
Linbacker Gary []
Actor Tom S^
   82. Booey Posted: March 30, 2012 at 02:18 PM (#4093087)
How can I put this. I don't care

So assuming that Jack Morris (for example) really was a legitimate borderline HOFer, you don't think his game 7 should push him any closer to the in line at all? If Schilling/Smoltz were right on the borderline, you don't think their postseason numbers should be factored into the conversation even a little bit?
   83. Ray (RDP) Posted: March 30, 2012 at 02:31 PM (#4093096)
#82: no, and no.

---------

I'll also note that Pettitte's 263 innings are just about the most a pitcher can possibly have. Most pitchers have a number a lot less than that. And so the argument that the postseason "adds miles" to a pitcher's arm amounts to like 5-10 extra innings a year for most pitchers, if that. It's absurd to conclude that that matters.
   84. cercopithecus aethiops Posted: March 30, 2012 at 02:54 PM (#4093124)
I don't have a dog in this fight, Ray, but it's not about most pitchers. It's about pitchers who have thrown exceptionally high numbers of post-season innings. Pettitte's post-season innings by season:

1995 7.0
1996 32.0
1997 11.2
1998 19.0
1999 18.1
2000 31.2
2001 29.2
2002 3.0
2003 34.1
2005 25.1
2009 30.2
2010 14.0
   85. Fancy Pants Handles lap changes with class Posted: March 30, 2012 at 02:56 PM (#4093125)
Maybe the 16 year guy didn't play 18 years because he accrued 2 years of wear and tear playing in the playoffs. Why are you penalizing him while rewarding the player that was not forced to play these extra innings?

Seriously. Could you at least pretend to read my posts? They weren't that long. I specifically went out of my way to specify that regardless of what you do, you are going to end up being unfair to someone. That's simply the reality of the situation, I just reject the notion that you can pretend it doesn't exist, and that one way of dealing with it doesn't crate any problems whatsoever.

Mind you, I am not saying it is wrong to award extra credit for postseason performance, since not giving extra credit is also unfair.

By the same token, it's unfair to deprive Pettite credit for actual innings he threw.

Are you really trying to rephrase my sentences, and then using those to refute what I wrote? Cause that's what it looks like.
   86. DL from MN Posted: March 30, 2012 at 02:59 PM (#4093134)
amounts to like 5-10 extra innings a year for most pitchers, if that


The longer the playoffs get the more this will have an impact. 30 extra IP when everyone else throws 190 means 15% more innings.
   87. Ray (RDP) Posted: March 30, 2012 at 03:07 PM (#4093141)
It certainly makes arguing that Pettitte didn't put up enough in-season innings less compelling. Teams save their starters for the longer playoffs by working them less down the stretch if they have the option.


Well, then - so much for the argument that Pettitte was being worked harder than other pitchers due to the postseason.

Since the Yankees were working him less hard down the stretch, that offsets the effect of the added postseason innings.
   88. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: March 30, 2012 at 03:08 PM (#4093145)
I don't have a dog in this fight, Ray, but it's not about most pitchers. It's about pitchers who have thrown exceptionally high numbers of post-season innings. Pettitte's post-season innings by season:

1995 7.0
1996 32.0
1997 11.2
1998 19.0
1999 18.1
2000 31.2
2001 29.2
2002 3.0
2003 34.1
2005 25.1
2009 30.2
2010 14.0


Also, we're talking 20-30 very high intensity innings at a point the pitcher is already tired. And we know tired pitchers are more vulnerable to injury.

All "miles" are not created equal. These are extra miles on bald tires, with bad alignment and dirty motor oil. The toll will be well above average.
   89. PreservedFish Posted: March 30, 2012 at 03:17 PM (#4093159)
I don't understand why we need the innings/endurance argument. The postseason is real MLB baseball, and it's extremely important. Why wouldn't we consider it?
   90. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: March 30, 2012 at 03:19 PM (#4093161)
I don't understand why we need the innings/endurance argument. The postseason is real MLB baseball, and it's extremely important. Why wouldn't we consider it?

I think everyone but Ray does.
   91. Ray (RDP) Posted: March 30, 2012 at 03:28 PM (#4093169)
I don't understand why we need the innings/endurance argument. The postseason is real MLB baseball, and it's extremely important. Why wouldn't we consider it?


Because the games are exhibition games and not all players have the same opportunity to participate. And the sample size issues are huge, worrying about what a player did over a span of 20 PA and such.

All people are doing is rewarding players -- but not penalizing them if they perform poorly! -- who happen to have good teammates. This is akin to caring about RBI or pitcher wins, and people really ought not engage in it.
   92. Blubaldo Jimenez (OMJ) Posted: March 30, 2012 at 03:30 PM (#4093174)
Seriously. Could you at least pretend to read my posts? They weren't that long. I specifically went out of my way to specify that regardless of what you do, you are going to end up being unfair to someone.


And I went out of my way to say it is my opinion that this statement is untrue. I believe in giving credit for all play that meets the following criteria:

1. MLB quality opponents. (excludes preseason, overseas leagues, WBC)

2. Good faith attempt to win, (excludes AS game)

3. Sufficient sample size.


If Player Y thinks it is unfair that Player X got an extra season in postseason play, he should have played an extra season. Now the counter argument to that is that someone like Pettitte got to add his innings mostly during his prime, as opposed to at the beginning or end of his career. I'd say the counter argument is that the quality of play in the postseason is higher. I also believe in docking a player for poor postseason play, if you take into account sample size and quality of play. And no bonus points for "Sweet Game Sevens."

I guess I was not clear about what I was saying. I believe this method of evaluation is fair to everyone and not contradictory.


Seriously. Could you at least pretend to read my posts? They weren't that long.


Ah, the 'everybody who does not share my view of things is crazy' an idiot argument. Always fun.
   93. Misirlou's been working for the drug squad Posted: March 30, 2012 at 03:38 PM (#4093180)
I'll also note that Pettitte's 263 innings are just about the most a pitcher can possibly have. Most pitchers have a number a lot less than that. And so the argument that the postseason "adds miles" to a pitcher's arm amounts to like 5-10 extra innings a year for most pitchers, if that. It's absurd to conclude that that matters.


How about Schilling and the bloody sock? It's quite likely that what he did in order to help the Sox finally get past the Yankees and claim their first crown since the Great War cost him a productive 2005. Now, I can anticipate your response will be something like "It doesn't matter because he is a lock and doesn't need the extra credit." But what if he did? What if he was on the border of the borderline and needed just one more good year to get over the hump? What if some voters feel he is there right now with the career he actually had? Would it be absurd for them to conclude "Well, normally a guy like this would be just a wee bit short, but I'll give him credit for what he did in the 2004 post season."?
   94. Ray (RDP) Posted: March 30, 2012 at 03:44 PM (#4093187)
Major league players don't choke under pressure, nor are they clutch. Any of them can have a good postseason. Any of them can have a bad postseason. It doesn't tell you anything meaningful. So they happened to have a good 20 PA span, or a game-winning home run, when everyone was watching. Whoop dee doo.

It's curious having to explain this to people.
   95. DL from MN Posted: March 30, 2012 at 03:46 PM (#4093190)
the games are exhibition games


No.
   96. Ray (RDP) Posted: March 30, 2012 at 03:46 PM (#4093191)
As I always have to point out, Schilling's bloody sock is inevitably brought up in these discussions precisely because it's so rare.
   97. Ray (RDP) Posted: March 30, 2012 at 03:47 PM (#4093193)
the games are exhibition games

No.


I don't see anyone lumping postseason stats in with regular season stats, either for single seasons or career numbers/records/etc.

   98. DL from MN Posted: March 30, 2012 at 03:48 PM (#4093194)
they happened to have a good 20 PA span


Which should be added to their other 500 PA just like every other 20PA span they had during the year.
   99. DL from MN Posted: March 30, 2012 at 03:49 PM (#4093196)
I don't see anyone lumping postseason stats in with regular season stats, either for single seasons or career numbers/records/etc.


This is really your argument - the stats are sorted into a different bucket? They don't count June stats in the "most career HR hit in May" bucket.
   100. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: March 30, 2012 at 03:49 PM (#4093197)
Major league players don't choke under pressure, nor are they clutch.

I call BS on that. Pitchers choke all the time. At the most extreme, Steve Blass disease is pure choking. Fielders choke; again Steve Sax, Macky Sasser, Knoblauch disease is the purest form. But Luis Castillo muffing a pop-up that's caught 999999 out of 1000000 times is pure choke.

Hitters don't tend to demonstrate big clutch/choke effects b/c hitting is purely reactive. There's no reason to extrapolate that to all baseball activities, or to other sports.

I believe there are clutch pitchers, and clutch QBs.
Page 1 of 2 pages  1 2 > 

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Harveys Wallbangers
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogPhoto of the day: Bill Murray, indy league ticket-taker
(102 - 12:27am, Sep 02)
Last: Bunny Vincennes

NewsblogNitkowski: Wanted: Major League manager...sort of.
(7 - 12:23am, Sep 02)
Last: steagles

NewsblogRon Roenicke rips into home-plate umpire
(17 - 12:18am, Sep 02)
Last: Bunny Vincennes

NewsblogAstros Fire Bo Porter
(54 - 12:16am, Sep 02)
Last: Zach

NewsblogBlue Jays Acquire Mayberry Jr.
(7 - 12:10am, Sep 02)
Last: Infinite Joost (Voxter)

NewsblogAthletics Acquire Adam Dunn
(43 - 11:46pm, Sep 01)
Last: Pasta-diving Jeter (jmac66)

NewsblogOT: Politics, September, 2014: ESPN honors Daily Worker sports editor Lester Rodney
(27 - 11:36pm, Sep 01)
Last: Morty Causa

NewsblogOT: The Soccer Thread August, 2014
(986 - 11:25pm, Sep 01)
Last: The Clarence Thomas of BBTF (scott)

NewsblogRobothal: Changed [Manny] Ramirez enjoyed helping Cubs prospects grow
(10 - 11:24pm, Sep 01)
Last: The Yankee Clapper

NewsblogOT:  2014 College Football pre-season thread
(101 - 11:17pm, Sep 01)
Last: Lance Reddick! Lance him!

NewsblogNo-hitter! Four Phillies pitchers combine to blank the Braves
(10 - 11:12pm, Sep 01)
Last: Best Regards, President of Comfort, Esq.

NewsblogOT: Monthly NBA Thread - September 2014
(5 - 11:07pm, Sep 01)
Last: DanO

NewsblogHBT: Jorge Soler with an extra-base hit in each of his first five games
(1 - 10:00pm, Sep 01)
Last: Cargo Cultist

NewsblogTigers' Miguel Cabrera appears to re-injure ankle, leaves game
(19 - 9:53pm, Sep 01)
Last: AJMcCringleberry

NewsblogOT: Politics, August 2014: DNC criticizes Christie’s economic record with baseball video
(6358 - 8:35pm, Sep 01)
Last: David Nieporent (now, with children)

Page rendered in 1.0759 seconds
52 querie(s) executed