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

Sunday, March 24, 2019

Source: Astros, Verlander reach $66M extension

The Houston Astros and ace Justin Verlander have agreed to a two-year, $66 million contract extension through the 2021 season, a league source with knowledge of the deal confirmed to ESPN on Saturday.

Astros owner Jim Crane on Friday had said there was mutual interest for an extension with the 36-year-old right-hander.

The news was first reported by KRIV-TV in Houston.

So, is this how long the Astros think their window will last, or just how long they think it will last with Verlander?

 

QLE Posted: March 24, 2019 at 07:05 AM | 54 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: astros, contract extensions, justin verlander

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.

   1. bfan Posted: March 24, 2019 at 08:17 AM (#5824924)
If the qualifying offer number is based on the mean of the top 125 salaries, that is going to markedly jump this year, isn't it? Quite a few numbers filling in at the top.

Does anyone know when the number fixes? As of opening day? Or does it look to the next year when it is applied, or the year just played? In another words, if deGrom or Rendon sign a big extension in season, starting in 2020, does that move the number?
   2. The Anthony Kennedy of BBTF (Scott) Posted: March 24, 2019 at 09:37 AM (#5824930)
I'd guess the latter, QLE. This extention takes Verlander through his age 39 season, at which point you probably don't want to be locked into 33m a year even for a guy who right now is one of the 5 best pitchers in baseball.
   3. bobm Posted: March 24, 2019 at 09:46 AM (#5824933)
CBA:

The 125 highest-paid Players initially shall be derived from all Players on a 40-man roster (or whose contracts have been assigned outright) or 60-Day Disabled List on August 31 of the most recently completed season (“Eligible Players”). In addition, Players who retired (whether or not they are placed on the Voluntary Retired List) or are placed on the Restricted List between the conclusion of the prior championship season and August 31 of the most recently completed championship season shall be considered Eligible Players, but only for the first year following such retirement or placement on the Restricted List.

In determining the 125 highest-paid Players, each Player’s salary for the season at issue (“Salary”) shall be calculated by adding the following: (i) the Player’s base salary for the year at issue (adjusted pursuant to any salary escalator effective for that season); (ii) a prorated portion of any applicable signing bonus; (iii) a prorated portion of any buyout associated with the first Club or Mutual option year of the Contract (or a deduction of the amount of the buyout if the option was exercised as described in Addendum A); and (iv) any bonuses that were earned by the Player as of the conclusion of the championship season. If any portion of the Player’s earnings in items (i)-(iv) of this paragraph is deferred, his Salary shall be discounted pursuant to the formula set forth in Addendum A.
   4. JRVJ Posted: March 24, 2019 at 01:08 PM (#5824941)
From everything I've read, he's happy playing in Houston, so good for Mr. Verlander.
   5. Walt Davis Posted: March 24, 2019 at 04:42 PM (#5824965)
If the qualifying offer number is based on the mean of the top 125 salaries, that is going to markedly jump this year, isn't it?

Not so sure about that. Trout was already making $34; Harper over $21; Verlander $28. Machado did get a big raise from $16 and Arenado moves from $26 to $35 next year. Stanton's ticks up a few million at some point. (I'm not clear if it's based on AAV or salary). But all of that only gets us up to about $40 M increase in the total but average that over 125 players and it's not a big deal. ($300 K) [and some of those kick in next year not this.]

I'm not sure where the cut-off is on the top 125 but you also have big first-year arb raises for Betts and Lindor but added together, they barely make more than Hunter Pence did last year so that hardly budges the needle. Pence $18, Adam Jones $17, Keuchel $13, Kimbrel $13, Gio $12, Beltre $18 and whoever else I forgot all coming off the books and I don't recall a lot of these types of contracts being signed this offseason.

Someobdy can check the actual history but my faulty memory suggests it has been going up about 5% a year. I'm not seeing any reason to think this year is gonna be substantially bigger, might be smaller depending on what eventually happens with Kimbrel and Keuchel.
   6. Master of the Horse Posted: March 24, 2019 at 05:30 PM (#5824967)
Verlander has had a pretty fascinating career.
   7. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: March 24, 2019 at 05:36 PM (#5824969)
Scherzer jumps to $42 mil this year, an increase of $20. Strasburg is also getting a $20 mil raise, to $38 mil.

you also have big first-year arb raises for Betts and Lindor but added together, they barely make more than Hunter Pence did last year so that hardly budges the needle.


Betts by himself is making $20 mil.
   8. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: March 24, 2019 at 06:21 PM (#5824973)
Just poking around BBREF, some other not insignificant raises this year:

Charlie Blackmon - 9 mil
Michael Brantley - 4.5
Gerrit Cole - 7
Anthony Rizzo - 5
Patrick Corbin - 5
deGrom - 10
Jean Segura - 5
Yasmani Grandal - 8
Justin Turner - 7
Hyun-Jin Ryu - 10
Kenley Jansen - 8
Marwin Gonzales - 7
Corey Kluber - 6
Khris davis - 6
Nathan Eovaldi - 15
Charlie Morton - 8





On the other hand, Jason Heyward drops 8 mil, Cole Hamels 3.5, Daniel Murphy 7.5, Jake Arrieta 5, Andrew McCutchen 5, Kershaw 5.5,

And according to BBREF, Machado makes only 12 mil this year, and Harper 11, so that's a combined drop of 14 mil
   9. Adam Starblind Posted: March 24, 2019 at 08:58 PM (#5825000)
Verlander has had a pretty fascinating career.


It's pretty awesome that he rebounded. He was one of the elite, and then he wasn't, and they usually don't come back.
   10. Brian White Posted: March 24, 2019 at 09:50 PM (#5825007)

It's pretty awesome that he rebounded. He was one of the elite, and then he wasn't, and they usually don't come back.


Is this really so? I mean, the bit about him no longer being an elite pitcher - he looks like a very good pitcher who had a single down year in 2014 and then missed a bit of time in 2015. Granted, the collapsing K-rate in 2014 wouldn't give one optimism going forward, but still. After his first full year, he's had all of three seasons in his career where he missed 200 IP *and* bettering a 115 ERA+ - 2014 (85 ERA+), 2015 (133 IP) and 2008 (92 ERA+). That's pretty amazing.
   11. Walt Davis Posted: March 25, 2019 at 12:19 AM (#5825023)
Yep, sorry, forgot Betts is year 2. But it's still just a raise of $10 M so their two raises combined still only roughly balance the "drop" from Pence.

For those not following, the average of the top 125 is of course the total of the top 125 divided by 125. Assuming Lindor now and Betts again are in the top 125 then that is $20 M added to the total ... but the top 125 loses Pence so that's $18 M off the total. "Normally" of course Pence would have been replaced by some new vet FA who just signed, say, a 5/$90 M contract ... but almost no contract like that was signed this offseason. So the total is certainly increased some but not a lot by Harper, Trout, etc. and it's increased by raises to the top arb players but then the total is losing a fair number of mid-tier FAs.

Scherzer jumps to $42 mil this year, an increase of $20. Strasburg is also getting a $20 mil raise, to $38 mil.

Again, this sort of thing depends on how they count this. Scherzer is not being paid $42, most of that is deferred. Same with Strasburg. So if it's AAV, these don't move the needle at all. Even if they're counted that way then Strasburg loses $13 M next year and another $10 for the year after, etc. wreaking havoc with those years' "average" for QO purposes.

The QO was at $18 last year (OK, $17.9). A 5% increase would be $18.8 representing a total increase of $113 M to the total. Trout I believe is up $0 this year (then just $2-3), Harper $5, Verlander $0 (then $5), Machado $14, Arenado $8 (then another $9 ... or $14 for both years by AAV). So, using the bigger number for Arenado that's adding just $33 M to last year's total and just another $7 M next year. Add Mookie's raise to bring it to $43. That's more than compensated by losing Beltre, Pence, Jones and Gio (total $65). We'll have to see what happens with Keuchel and Kimbrel but it seems unlikely they'll get big raises at this point.

Brantley was probably in the top 125 last year, received just $4.5 more (by AAV). I'm not sure how Britton suckered 3/$39 out of the Yanks but he made $12 last year. I forgot about Corbin, he got a big raise of $16 (to $23.5 ... he may not have been top 125 last year). Nelson Cruz makes the same as last year, looks like Donaldson does too. Eovaldi joins at $17 so he replaces Jones. Grandal got a $10-11 raise, Pollock added about $6. That's pretty much all of the other "big" signings.

Then there are the arb guys. I assume Lindor makes the 125 cutoff so that's a new $11. Bryant got a small raise. Obviously lots of other arb guys got raises.

I assume overall the total is up but it's hard to see where any big jump is going to come from. Based on what's above we're around $45-50. If we add in Strasburg and Scherzer than we're at closing in on that target for a 5% jump (which seems standard to me). I assume there are a number that aren't included so maybe we'll push past the 5%. But that's hardly a "marked" rise. Hey, I found the history:

2012: 13.3
2013: 14.1 (6%)
2014: 15.3 (8.5%)
2015: 15.8 (3%)
2016: 17.2 (9%)
2017: 17.4 (1%)
2018: 17.9 (3%)

That's a 5% annual rate. Over the last four iterations, it's down to 4%.
   12. TDF, trained monkey Posted: March 25, 2019 at 08:11 AM (#5825033)
Machado did get a big raise from $16

And according to BBREF, Machado makes only 12 mil this year
Cot's reports his contract as $10M for this year, with a $20M signing bonus. So $12M is right.

EDIT: and Harper 11 Same thing - $10M salary, $20M bonus.
   13. bfan Posted: March 25, 2019 at 09:04 AM (#5825037)
two points:

5% on 17.9 million (that is the word after "17.9")is just shy of $900,000.00. Frame of reference for whether that is "markedly", I guess.

That is interesting in the context of salaries being flat this year, over-all (if that is the case). If that is true (I have not seen the final numbers), then the collective top 16.66% of players' salaries is going up 5%, and everyone else, as a collective group, is going down, and it looks like this is creating a larger and larger separation every year. I think this is where Bill James said better analytics would take us. A replaceable player is worth the minimum roster spot money, and the progression to Mike Trout level is not linear.
   14. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: March 25, 2019 at 09:40 AM (#5825040)
Add Mookie's raise to bring it to $43. That's more than compensated by losing Beltre, Pence, Jones and Gio (total $65).


Ryu made 8 mil last year. I assume that's not top 125. He makes 18 this year, replacing Beltre. Charlie Blackmon goes from 12.5 to 21.5. He's replaced by Marwin Gonzalez who jumps from 5 to 12. So the combination effectively adds 21 mil to the pot. deGrom goes from 7.4 (probably not top 125) to 17, more than replacing Gio.
   15. DanG Posted: March 25, 2019 at 12:57 PM (#5825112)
Verlander has had a pretty fascinating career.
He sure has, from Day 1.

Last year someone online was doubting that Verlander was really a "superstar". I just said "duh" and wrote this summary:

I have little doubt the term was often applied to Verlander as early as 2007.

A brief review of JV’s development shows he was building credentials and public awareness long before his historic 2011 season:

•Verlander was slowed down in high school by illness. Perhaps that is why he stayed local for college, attending Old Dominion from 2002-04. There he established many school and conference strikeout records.
•In 2003 he was on the USA team at the Pan-American games that won the silver medal.
•In 2004 he was the 2nd player taken in the amateur draft.
•In 2005 he blew away the competition in his only minor league season: 11-2, 1.29 ERA. He was the starting pitcher for the US in the Futures Game.
•In 2006 he went 17-9, 125 ERA+, was named Rookie of the Year and started two games in the World Series.
•In 2007 he went 18-6, 125 ERA+, leading the league in W-L%. He pitched a no-hitter and made his first All-Star team.
•In 2008 JV and the Tigers had a down year. He went 11-17, leading the league in losses on a last place team.
•In 2009 he went 19-9. This was probably his first “great” season, leading the league in W, SO, IP, GS, SO/9 and finishing 3rd in Cy Young voting. His victory in game #162 forced a playoff game for the division title.
•Just another normal ace year in 2010: 18-9, +200 SO, 124 ERA+, All-star game.

The rest is history. With back-to-back 8 WAR seasons plus eight other years of 4+ WAR, and already 148 points on the HOF Monitor, it seems strange that anyone would question labeling Verlander a superstar.
   16. JL72 Posted: March 25, 2019 at 01:35 PM (#5825121)
it seems strange that anyone would question labeling Verlander a superstar.


Verlander's problem is that his peak is not as high as Kershaw's. No shame in that and it certainly does not diminish his accomplishments.

With Verlander seeing a resurgence, and Kershaw seeming to have some problems, it will be worth watching to see if Verlander ends up with the better career (they are about equal, though Kershaw had done so in three fewer seasons).
   17. What did Billy Ripken have against ElRoy Face? Posted: March 25, 2019 at 01:58 PM (#5825134)
This might be a dumb question, but you never know with the voters...Verlander is a lock for the HOF as long as he provides at least some value over the next 3 seasons, right?
   18. JL72 Posted: March 25, 2019 at 02:07 PM (#5825136)
Verlander is a lock for the HOF as long as he provides at least some value over the next 3 seasons, right?


I think so. An MVP, a Cy Young (plus three seconds and a third), RoY and beat the Yankees on the way to winning the World Series. He currently has 204 wins, 2700 strikeouts, a 126 ERA+ and 63.6 WAR.

He probably would get in now.
   19. Master of the Horse Posted: March 25, 2019 at 02:27 PM (#5825146)
   20. JL72 Posted: March 25, 2019 at 02:50 PM (#5825164)
#19 - Good article. Thanks.
   21. Master of the Horse Posted: March 25, 2019 at 02:56 PM (#5825168)
JL: You're welcome.
   22. Spahn Insane Posted: March 25, 2019 at 03:06 PM (#5825173)
I wouldn't call Verlander's career arc "typical," but to post 9's point, seems to me it's not unheard of for great pitchers go through a lull mid-career when their stuff declines and it takes sometimes a year or two for them to figure out how to pitch effectively with lesser stuff, but they can recover most of what they lost when they're starting from such a high level. Obviously Roger Clemens ain't typical of anything, but he's another great pitcher who had a similar down stretch mid-career before he won about another 4 CYAs. Verlander's trajectory sort of reminds me of that; he's once again a legitimately great pitcher after his down spell.

Other guys, like Tanana, reinvented themselves as completely different types of pitchers, but that's not how I see Verlander.
   23. Spahn Insane Posted: March 25, 2019 at 03:07 PM (#5825174)
And yeah, I think Verlander's a HOF lock.
   24. alilisd Posted: March 25, 2019 at 03:27 PM (#5825182)
It's pretty awesome that he rebounded. He was one of the elite, and then he wasn't, and they usually don't come back.


Maybe it's explained in the article, but I thought his downturn was due to an abdominal injury, not a shoulder/elbow/arm. Once he got his core healthy again he was back on track.
   25. Swoboda is freedom Posted: March 25, 2019 at 04:06 PM (#5825196)
The rest is history. With back-to-back 8 WAR seasons plus eight other years of 4+ WAR, and already 148 points on the HOF Monitor, it seems strange that anyone would question labeling Verlander a superstar.


Never mind the whole Kate Upton thing.
   26. caspian88 Posted: March 25, 2019 at 05:12 PM (#5825214)
Verlander is the greatest Virginia-born pitcher, ahead of Eppa Rixey and Deacon Phillippe.

Verlander might be the greatest Virginia-born baseball player in history - David Wright and Paul Hines are his only two real competition. This surprises me - Virginia is a medium-sized Eastern state. I understand that the South was somewhat underrepresented through much of baseball history, but I would have expected more than one Hall of Famer.

Then again, Tennessee has no Hall of Famers (Bob Caruthers and Todd Helton) and is a state with similar size and geography.
   27. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: March 25, 2019 at 05:57 PM (#5825221)
Well, the "born in" state frequently has little to do with where a player is from. Robin Yount was born in Danville IL, but never lived in the state, even as an infant. Rickey Henderson was born in Chicago, but his family moved to Oakland when he was 2. Joe Morgan was born in TX, raised in Oakland. Greg Maddux was a military brat, born in TX, but lived all over, including a long stretch in Spain. Alex Rodriguez was born in NYC, but raised in the DR and Miami. And so on.
   28. TDF, trained monkey Posted: March 25, 2019 at 07:56 PM (#5825233)
Verlander is a lock for the HOF as long as he provides at least some value over the next 3 seasons, right?

I think so. An MVP, a Cy Young (plus three seconds and a third), RoY and beat the Yankees on the way to winning the World Series. He currently has 204 wins, 2700 strikeouts, a 126 ERA+ and 63.6 WAR.

He probably would get in now.
You know, it's funny - at first blush I'd say the same. But if you look at his most similar players by raw stats, they define the current in/out line. And if you look at the guys around him in JAWS (which is a more saberish arguement)...well, that doesn't paint a glowing picture either.

So I would have to say, yes he needs to add some value over the next 3 seasons to be clearly "in".
   29. PreservedFish Posted: March 25, 2019 at 08:25 PM (#5825240)
I've been expecting Sean to improve BR's "most similar" lists for nearly 20 years, at least by era-adjusting them if nothing else. It hasn't happened yet, and I suppose it's not going to.

There is no living Hall of Fame voter that will note the superficial statistical resemblance between Verlander and Bob Welch and determine that Verlander must not be a HOFer.

The guy is, and deserves to be, a lock.
   30. Master of the Horse Posted: March 25, 2019 at 08:37 PM (#5825244)
29: I heard an interview with SF, and there are so many other priorities on all the websites this feature is way down the list.
   31. bachslunch Posted: March 25, 2019 at 09:19 PM (#5825254)
BBRef WAR has Verlander looking good as a lower eschelon HoFer right now, actually. He has 63.2 WAR, and all the retired starters surrounding him are in: Halladay, Willis, Faber, and Feller are just above, while Marichal, Newhouser, Griffith, and Welch are immediately below. And he’s presumably not done yet, which will only enhance his case.
   32. DanG Posted: March 25, 2019 at 09:26 PM (#5825256)
And if you look at the guys around him in JAWS (which is a more saberish arguement)...well, that doesn't paint a glowing picture either.
It doesn't? Verlander is currently in a three-way tie for 57th among starting pitchers in JAWS, with hall of famers Dazzy Vance and Red Ruffing. Just below them are three more hall of famers: Jim Bunning, John Smoltz, and Rube Waddell. If JV puts up three WAR this year he'll pass five more hall of famers: Joe McGinnity, Stan Coveleski, Ted Lyons, Clark Griffith, and Don Drysdale. All ten of those pitchers are also in the Hall of Merit, so we're talking about pitchers who deserve their place in the HOF. Verlander is already amongst good company on the JAWS list.
   33. TDF, trained monkey Posted: March 26, 2019 at 08:14 AM (#5825292)
It doesn't? Verlander is currently in a three-way tie for 57th among starting pitchers in JAWS, with hall of famers Dazzy Vance and Red Ruffing. Just below them are three more hall of famers: Jim Bunning, John Smoltz, and Rube Waddell. If JV puts up three WAR this year he'll pass five more hall of famers: Joe McGinnity, Stan Coveleski, Ted Lyons, Clark Griffith, and Don Drysdale. All ten of those pitchers are also in the Hall of Merit, so we're talking about pitchers who deserve their place in the HOF. Verlander is already amongst good company on the JAWS list.
Among recent pitchers, he's behind Luis Tiant (who never got more than 30% support - which was in his 1st year on the ballot), Kevin Brown (who was one and done), and Rick Reuschel (ditto). He's also just ahead of one and done David Cone.

Vance (17) and Ruffing (18) took almost twice as many ballots as are currently allowed. McGinnity, Coveleski, Griffith, and Waddell were Vet committee selections.

I think he's probably a HOFer, but as I said - he'll need to add some more value to be clearly "in".
   34. PreservedFish Posted: March 26, 2019 at 08:50 AM (#5825299)
Is there any indication that voters won't be grading SPs on something of a curve? When Justin Verlander puts up 250 IP and 8 WAR, it's is more impressive than Stan Coveleski or Rube Waddell doing it. I can't even tell if TDF is arguing about whether Verlander is likely to get in, or if he deserves to get in, but either way, his comparisons are really not very helpful. Yeah yeah, we know that Kevin Brown and Rick Reuschel were underrated by everyone, a problem that Verlander will not have.
   35. TDF, trained monkey Posted: March 26, 2019 at 08:56 AM (#5825302)
I can't even tell if TDF is arguing about whether Verlander is likely to get in, or if he deserves to get in
Likely.
Yeah yeah, we know that Kevin Brown and Rick Reuschel were underrated by everyone, a problem that Verlander will not have.
How do "we" know Verlander will be treated differently?
   36. TDF, trained monkey Posted: March 26, 2019 at 09:16 AM (#5825307)
To add to #35 - You don't have to go very far down the list (from Verlander at #57 to Cone at #63) to get where very few pitchers are HOFers. That sure looks like a borderline to me.
   37. Benji Gil Gamesh VII - The Opt-Out Awakens Posted: March 26, 2019 at 09:51 AM (#5825329)
To add to #35 - You don't have to go very far down the list (from Verlander at #57 to Cone at #63) to get where very few pitchers are HOFers. That sure looks like a borderline to me.
I think you're correct, purely on value. But I imagine the point is that Verlander has enough narrative and other markers--he was RoY, Cy, MVP, won a ring and has generally been excellent in the postseason, has put up 2 near-prime seasons in his mid-30s, etc.--that it will likely easily elevate him above those for whom he has similar value.

Edit: That said, "But what about David Cone?" is still a fair retort to that. All I have there is that Cone's itinerant nature probably hurt him, and maybe he wasn't seen as the same kind of dominant (feared?) presence as Verlander?
   38. DanG Posted: March 26, 2019 at 10:21 AM (#5825341)
But I imagine the point is that Verlander has enough narrative and other markers--he was RoY, Cy, MVP, won a ring and has generally been excellent in the postseason, has put up 2 near-prime seasons in his mid-30s, etc.--that it will likely easily elevate him above those for whom he has similar value.
Exactly. When you're talking about "likely" you need to look at the things where the HOF voters place importance.

I still look at the HOF Monitor. BB-Ref is still running the outdated version of the formula, but it remains a good indicator of electability for HOF candidates. Verlander has 148 points, #46 all time. Compare this to these guys and it's clear who the voters will favor:

103 Cone (96th)
97 Tiant (107th)
93 K. Brown (117th)
48 Reuschel

Generally, if you're below 120 you'll have a tough time getting elected. Blyleven and Mussina, at 121 points, help to demonstrate this point. Also recent VC selections Morris (123) and L. Smith (127). There are always a few weird exceptions, but it's generally a useful indicator.

And yes, voters are paying increasing attention to WAR. When you have a candidate like Verlander who does well on both the old and the new measures, you have a guy who's a shoo-in for election.
   39. PreservedFish Posted: March 26, 2019 at 10:26 AM (#5825347)
How do "we" know Verlander will be treated differently?


This is like asking how we know that Ichiro (60 WAR) will be treated differently than Bobby Abreu (60 WAR). Are you a human that watches baseball, or are you actually a trained monkey?
   40. JL72 Posted: March 26, 2019 at 10:54 AM (#5825361)
When you have a candidate like Verlander who does well on both the old and the new measures, you have a guy who's a shoo-in for election.


While I agree with this, I also recognize that voters can be fickle, especially with starting pitchers. I could just as easily see him missing in his first year at 65%.

Verlander is in much better shape for first ballot induction with three more years that add another 30-40 wins and 12-15 WAR.
   41. TDF, trained monkey Posted: March 26, 2019 at 10:55 AM (#5825363)
This is like asking how we know that Ichiro (60 WAR) will be treated differently than Bobby Abreu (60 WAR). Are you a human that watches baseball, or are you actually a trained monkey?
Please make the case that Kevin Brown or Rick Reuschel are undeserving of the HOF while Verlander is clearly deserving.

Because of the CYA/MVP? Brown and Reuschel were also the best player in their leagues for a single season. Ringzzz? Brown has as many as Verlander.

I think you're projecting your thoughts/biases on the voters. As I said, I think he's probably a HOFer but I don't see anything that puts him clearly over the line for the voters.
   42. PreservedFish Posted: March 26, 2019 at 10:57 AM (#5825365)
Please make the case that Kevin Brown or Rick Reuschel are undeserving of the HOF while Verlander is clearly deserving.


Earlier I asked if you were talking about whether or not Verlander is likely to be inducted, or whether or not Verlander was deserving of election.

You said you were arguing about the likelihood that he be inducted. Now you're asking me why he deserves it.

You still seem to be confused about this.
   43. PreservedFish Posted: March 26, 2019 at 11:00 AM (#5825369)
Because of the CYA/MVP? Brown and Reuschel were also the best player in their leagues for a single season.


I mean, this shows that you're confused. You're talking about two different things here.
   44. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: March 26, 2019 at 11:14 AM (#5825380)
How do "we" know Verlander will be treated differently?


Because Verlander right now is practically a clone of Roy Halladay, and Halladay got 85% on his first ballot.
   45. DanG Posted: March 26, 2019 at 11:17 AM (#5825383)
I could just as easily see him missing in his first year at 65%.
Perhaps, but you also need to consider the quality of new HOF candidates. The past decade has been a temporary aberration; the next decade will see quality candidates entering the BBWAA ballot at about half the rate of the 2010-19 elections.

We'll see, but I don't think there will be much of a backlog of good candidates on the ballot when JV becomes eligible. It seems more likely that the BBWAA will be starved for good candidates, so that Verlander is ushered quickly in.
   46. JL72 Posted: March 26, 2019 at 11:18 AM (#5825384)
Because Verlander right now is practically a clone of Roy Halladay, and Halladay got 85% on his first ballot.


Fortunately, Verlander has not (yet) died in an airplane crash.

I am not sure how much of Halladay's 85% on the first ballot is because of that.
   47. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: March 26, 2019 at 11:25 AM (#5825389)
I am not sure how much of Halladay's 85% on the first ballot is because of that.


Some, no doubt. Maybe even enough to put him over the top. But not so much that he wouldn't have eventually gotten in without, and fairly quickly.
   48. JL72 Posted: March 26, 2019 at 11:28 AM (#5825391)
It seems more likely that the BBWAA will be starved for good candidates, so that Verlander is ushered quickly in.


From your lips to the voters ears ...

I admit that I am pessimistic about HoF voters. Alan Trammell was my favorite player growing up (with Lou being a close second). To see Trammell not get voted in and Lou get bounced on the first ballot really soured me on the whole institution. Intellectually, I recognize it is a different electorate but I still can't get my hopes up.
   49. What did Billy Ripken have against ElRoy Face? Posted: March 26, 2019 at 11:29 AM (#5825392)
It pretty much comes down to whether voters acknowledge the changed/changing role of the starting pitcher, right? If they don't elect guys like Verlander, the Hall is going to be pretty much the Hall of Great Position Players* from here on out.

*And Harold Baines.
   50. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: March 26, 2019 at 11:32 AM (#5825393)
It pretty much comes down to whether voters acknowledge the changed/changing role of the starting pitcher, right? If they don't elect guys like Verlander, the Hall is going to be pretty much the Hall of Great Position Players* from here on out.


Exactly. Verlander is the platonic ideal of a 21st century HOF starting pitcher. If not him, who?
   51. JAHV Posted: March 26, 2019 at 11:49 AM (#5825406)
I'll echo others - I think it would be unfathomable to see Verlander treated like Mussina, much less like Kevin Brown. Verlander has just about all the "feel" things going for him - dominant stuff, no hitters, World Series win, late career resurgence (could still change, I suppose), awards, tough competitor without being a complete ass, solid postseason record (although the World Series performances aren't great). Yeah, his WAR and JAWS might define borderline at this point, but even if he puts up no more value, he'll probably get the benefit of the doubt from anyone who values that kind of stuff even a little bit or uses them as a tie-breaker. I tend to be a small Hall type, but Verlander makes my personal cut after his last few years, and I think he'll be elected fairly easily.
   52. What did Billy Ripken have against ElRoy Face? Posted: March 26, 2019 at 12:40 PM (#5825426)
His Hall of Fame plaque will nicely complement his wife's Hall of Fame bust.
   53. pikepredator Posted: March 26, 2019 at 12:47 PM (#5825429)
Count me among those who think Verlander will get plenty of HOF votes from both traditionalists (he is well-regarded as a modern-day workhorse - as was Halladay), as well as from the analytics-friendly crowd. As a baseball fan with a foot in both worlds, Verlander is one of my favorites, so I am biased.

I consider him to be the real-life embodiment of the pitcher Jack Morris' ardent supporters think Morris was. Except for the pitching to the score part. Verlander never takes his foot of the gas. In fact, he lead-foots it as the game goes on. I hope he has the staying power to dominate until he's 42.
   54. Traderdave Posted: March 26, 2019 at 02:44 PM (#5825503)
53

Concur all points.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

News

All News | Prime News

Old-School Newsstand


BBTF Partner

Dynasty League Baseball

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
A triple short of the cycle
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 4-18-2019
(11 - 2:19pm, Apr 18)
Last: TDF, trained monkey

NewsblogOT - Catch-All Pop Culture Extravaganza (April 2019)
(333 - 2:14pm, Apr 18)
Last: Hysterical & Useless

NewsblogWhite Sox-Royals benches clear, managers go after each other | The Kansas City Star
(22 - 2:11pm, Apr 18)
Last: Rusty Priske

NewsblogRed Sox injury: Where things stand with Red Sox second baseman Dustin Pedroia's knee | WEEI
(4 - 2:05pm, Apr 18)
Last: Jose is an Absurd Kahuna

Sox TherapyWe Can Be Concerned Now
(41 - 2:01pm, Apr 18)
Last: Jose is an Absurd Kahuna

NewsblogOT Soccer Thread, v.2019
(1163 - 1:57pm, Apr 18)
Last: jmurph

Gonfalon Cubs2019 Season Predictions
(76 - 1:56pm, Apr 18)
Last: Meatwad

Hall of MeritMost Meritorious Player: 1915 Discussion
(12 - 1:49pm, Apr 18)
Last: DL from MN

NewsblogOT - NBA thread (Playoffs through off-season)
(90 - 1:49pm, Apr 18)
Last: Jtsports01

NewsblogMLB umpires missed 34,294 ball-strike calls in 2018, study shows
(196 - 1:22pm, Apr 18)
Last: Never Give an Inge (Dave)

NewsblogExclusive: Giants acknowledge it’s finally time to explore moving in the fences at Oracle Park – The Athletic
(26 - 12:52pm, Apr 18)
Last: .

NewsblogWe want OMNICHATTER!, not a belly scratcher, for April 17, 2019
(65 - 12:24pm, Apr 18)
Last: The usual palaver and twaddle (Met Fan Charlie)

NewsblogBrian Cashman defends Yankees medical staff after Greg Bird injury
(14 - 12:15pm, Apr 18)
Last: The usual palaver and twaddle (Met Fan Charlie)

NewsblogContract Extension Fever Isn’t Just About Economics | FanGraphs Baseball
(51 - 12:01pm, Apr 18)
Last: .

Newsblog'Major League' turns 30: How a Dodgers hero helped turn Hollywood stars into a real baseball team
(13 - 11:21am, Apr 18)
Last: Greg Pope

Page rendered in 0.4979 seconds
46 querie(s) executed