Mussina is significantly better than Glavine

[DrungoHazewood]

To make the HOF, you need to be the best of the best for the years (at least 10) that you play, can you honestly say that Mussina was "the best of the best"? I surely can't, not when during the same era you had guys like Glavine, Smoltz, Maddox, R. Johnson, Pedro, Clemens (but that's another discussion of its own), etc.

How many current HOF pitchers meet your criteria? Probably not much more than 50%, even when most of them played in 8-team leagues and only had to be better than most of the pitchers on seven other teams.

By your standard Sandy Koufax is out - he was only a dominant pitcher for about five seasons. Addie Joss, well he didn't even play 10 years, so he's out. There's a long list of HOF pitchers you'd eject, like Chief Bender, Herb Pennock, Jack Chesbro, Vic Willis, Catfish Hunter, Bob Lemon... Whitey Ford was no more dominant or durable than Mussina despite playing in a smaller league on a dynasty. Joe McGinnity only appeared in 10 MLB seasons, including one with an ERA+ of 78, so he's out. Jim Bunning is Mike Mussina with 50 fewer wins. Burleigh Grimes led the league in losses (1x) almost as often as wins (2x) and he was allowed to throw the spitter, so he's out. Dizzy Dean and his six years as a regular starter... out. Don Drysdale led the league in wins the same number of times as Mussina, pitched fewer innings, had a higher park-adjusted ERA. After his first four seasons Old Hoss Radbourne was a league-average starter, so he's no HOFer. Red Ruffing led the league in losses and earned runs allowed more than anything else. Eppa Rixey was clearly not as dominant as Mussina, with more seasons leading in losses than wins.

If you're going to make the HOF critera "best of the best for 10+ years" you're going to have to throw 30, 40, 50% of current HOFers including a fair number considered inner circle guys out on the street.

[DrungoHazewood]

You say that he's in the 2nd tier of AL pitchers, meaning that there is a whole tier of players above him in the AL (not to mention the NL pitchers that you aren't considering in this statement). As I said before, the HOF is for the best of the best of all MLB players...not 2nd tier in just the AL.

So do Duke Snider and Richie Ashburn get bumped from the Hall because they were peers of Mantle and Mays? Clearly Snider and Ashburn were 2nd tier.

As I mentioned in my last post there are many, many HOFers who don't meet the criteria of being the best of the best for a decade or more.

That's one mistake that alot of people make with the HOF in my opinion. Just because one player got in with lesser stats/awards/etc., doesn't automatically lower the bar for future players. You can't equally compare players from different generations/eras when determining entry into the HOF, it's how they stacked up against others in their era. If they dominate their era, then you can start comparing to other generations of HOF members, but not before.

1) All eras don't have equal talent distribution, so the best pitcher of one era may not have been the 10th best in another.

2) Somehow you need to reconcile your "lowering the bar" statement with the facts. The Hall has no defined standard except that of who has already been inducted, and there are a large number of players in the Hall defining that de facto standard who weren't as dominant as Mussina. To keep a player like Mussina out you have to accept that the standards of today and the future will be dramatically higher than the standards for induction in the past.

[Number5]

So do Duke Snider and Richie Ashburn get bumped from the Hall because they were peers of Mantle and Mays? Clearly Snider and Ashburn were 2nd tier.

As I mentioned in my last post there are many, many HOFers who don't meet the criteria of being the best of the best for a decade or more.

1) All eras don't have equal talent distribution, so the best pitcher of one era may not have been the 10th best in another.

2) Somehow you need to reconcile your "lowering the bar" statement with the facts. The Hall has no defined standard except that of who has already been inducted, and there are a large number of players in the Hall defining that de facto standard who weren't as dominant as Mussina. To keep a player like Mussina out you have to accept that the standards of today and the future will be dramatically higher than the standards for induction in the past.

Interesting fact: Duke Snider led the majors in home runs for the 1950's.

[OFFNY]

Interesting fact: Duke Snider led the majors in home runs for the 1950's.

Even though Mays missed two and-a-half seasons of the decade (one and-a-half seasons serving in the military, plus he wasn't a rookie until 1951), and Mantle also missed one season of the decade (like Mays, he missed the 1950 season), that's still pretty impressive.

Snider hit 326 HR's in that 10-year span. He slowed considerably in the final 2 years of said span (1958 and 1959), hitting only 38 home runs combined in those 2 years. In 8 years between 1950 and 1957, Snider hit 288 HR's, for an average of 36 HR's per season.

Mantle hit 280 HR's in the decade, minus 1950, which he didn't play in. He would have had to hit 46 home runs to have tied Snider, and 47 to have gone ahead of him, so there's a pretty good chance that Snider might have edged him out anyway had he (Mantle) played that additional season. For what it's worth, Mantle hit 40 HR's the seasons after the decade ended (1960), and 54 HR's the year after that (1961), so it probably would have been really close.

Mays on the other hand, hit 250 home runs in the decade, minus the 2 and-a-half years that he didn't play. He would have had to hit 76 HR's in those 2 and-a-half missed seasons to have tied Snider, and 77 to have been ahead of him, so I think that it's likely that he (Mays) would have hit at least a few more HR's than Snider had he played the entire decade.

The previous two paragraphs are speculation, but I still think that it's interesting to ponder.

******************************************

Also to be taken into consideration is that Ebbets Field was a hitters park, especially for left-handed batters, as was Snider.

The Polo Grounds (where Mays' Giants played for most of the decade before his team moved to San Francisco in 1958) was great for home runs IF you could pull the ball up the line, or close to it. However, once you started to go a considerable distance away from the foul lines, it was very hard to whack one over the fence, and by the time that you got close to straightaway center, it was nearly impossible to clear the wall.

As a switch-hitter, Mantle had the extremes in the original Yankee Stadium. It was a dream for left-handed power hitters (like Gehrig, Ruth, and Maris), but a nightmare for right-handed power hitters (like Joe DiMaggio and Tony Lazzeri.)

[weams]

Did PA pay for the statues or was that MSA money?

His O's career is a bit more impressive then his time with the Yanks but I think it is close enough that will let him pick his hat, and I think he picks NY. No O's hat, no statue.

It was Orioles money. Not MSA. Toby was commissioned by the Angelos family.

[Can_of_corn]

It was Orioles money. Not MSA. Toby was commissioned by the Angelos family.

Keep reading.

[weams]

Matt Keough: And an ugly girlfriend.

Scout Barry: What does that mean?

Matt Keough: Ugly girl friend means no confidence.

Keogh's wife.

[OFFNY]

Matt Keough: And an ugly girlfriend.

Scout Barry: What does that mean?

Matt Keough: Ugly girl friend means no confidence.

Keogh's wife.

OOO If that's ugly, I'd settle for ugly. :hearts:

[EagleOriole]

First of all, any writer who lets a player's attitude towards the media affect his vote shouldn't have a vote. Second of all, Mussina reportedly mellowed considerably during his time in New York and was well respected by the media there in the end. Third, I wonder how many of the 571 voters ever even met Mussina personally. Far less than half, I'd bet.

Of course you are correct, but reputation's are hard to overcome and he had a bad one...not Erik Bedard bad, but he was pretty aloof.

[Ori-Al]

Given the "stuff" and number of great pitches Mussina had, there is a legitimate question as to why his numbers weren't actually better. His best season may have been his first full season....1992. I remember watching him pitch and always wondering how he doesn't win 20 games every year. Part of it was obviously the competition of the AL East, and another part of it was perhaps not having one completely dominant out-pitch.

It also seemed like with Mussina that he was always in the second-tier (as someone else said). He never had that one dominant season, or one dominant postseason that led to a title. He could not crack the top tier of Maddux, Unit, Pedro, etc. The guy had how many no-hitters or perfect games broken up in some painful 9th inning fashion....I remember for sure the Sandy Alomar one in 1997 and the Carl Crawford one for NY when he was a single strike away.

Save for a couple of seasons, Mussina played on Bad teams, yet his winning percentage for his orioles career was well abovethe team overall. The braves consistently had good teams.

Comparing Mussina to Palmer, recall that Palmer pitched in four-man rotations, so he got more starts per season. Palmer also played on consistently good team, with strong offenses.

[Tx Oriole]

Even though Mays missed two and-a-half seasons of the decade (one and-a-half seasons serving in the military, plus he wasn't a rookie until 1951), and Mantle also missed one season of the decade (like Mays, he missed the 1950 season), that's still pretty impressive.

Snider hit 326 HR's in that 10-year span. He slowed considerably in the final 2 years of said span (1958 and 1959), hitting only 38 home runs combined in those 2 years. In 8 years between 1950 and 1957, Snider hit 288 HR's, for an average of 36 HR's per season.

Mantle hit 280 HR's in the decade, minus 1950, which he didn't play in. He would have had to hit 46 home runs to have tied Snider, and 47 to have gone ahead of him, so there's a pretty good chance that Snider might have edged him out anyway had he (Mantle) played that additional season. For what it's worth, Mantle hit 40 HR's the seasons after the decade ended (1960), and 54 HR's the year after that (1961), so it probably would have been really close.

Mays on the other hand, hit 250 home runs in the decade, minus the 2 and-a-half years that he didn't play. He would have had to hit 76 HR's in those 2 and-a-half missed seasons to have tied Snider, and 77 to have been ahead of him, so I think that it's likely that he (Mays) would have hit at least a few more HR's than Snider had he played the entire decade.

The previous two paragraphs are speculation, but I still think that it's interesting to ponder.

******************************************

Also to be taken into consideration is that Ebbets Field was a hitters park, especially for left-handed batters, as was Snider.

The Polo Grounds (where Mays' Giants played for most of the decade before his team moved to San Francisco in 1958) was great for home runs IF you could pull the ball up the line, or close to it. However, once you started to go a considerable distance away from the foul lines, it was very hard to whack one over the fence, and by the time that you got close to straightaway center, it was nearly impossible to clear the wall.

As a switch-hitter, Mantle had the extremes in the original Yankee Stadium. It was a dream for left-handed power hitters (like Gehrig, Ruth, and Maris), but a nightmare for right-handed power hitters (like Joe DiMaggio and Tony Lazzeri.)

Thanks for the info. I didnt know about any of that.

[Tx Oriole]

OOO If that's ugly, I'd settle for ugly. :hearts:

Me too. She isn't ugly at all.

[russ snyder]

Keogh's wife.

Matt Keough obviuosly has a lot of confidence.

[Frobby]

No, no. I meant to me Mussina was in the second tier of the best pitchers in the AL. Pedro et al. was the first tier and Mussina was in the second. Sorry for the confusion. And I think Glavine was pretty similar in the NL to a large extent, but to me Glavine was just more "extraordinary". I just could never figure out how he was so damn good. And I wasn't comparing stats among eras, I was splitting hairs about the top of the very best versus the bottom of the very best within eras.

Well, how many tiers are there, and where do you cut off who gets in to the HOF? I think we can all agree that Clemens, Maddux, Randy Johnson and Pedro Martinez were better than Mussina. For me, the next four of that era are (in alphabetical order) Glavine, Mussina, Schilling and Smoltz. Glavine's in the Hall now so no point in debating him further, I guess. I think you can argue the order between Mussina, Schilling and Smoltz any number of ways. For me, I'd put them all in the Hall of Fame, eventually.

But here is what is really going to disturb me: if Andy Pettitte gets voted into the Hall and Mussina does not. Pettitte won't be on the ballot until 2019, but I suspect Mussina still won't have been voted in by then. If the voters want to put Pettitte in, that's okay with me, but not over Mussina. No way, no how.

There really is nobody else who is a contemporary of the pitchers listed above who warrants any consideration (unless you consider Roy Halladay a contemporary, but the prime of his career was a full decade after these guys started their prime years).

The pitcher pipeline (in my opinion):

Already eligible: Clemens, Schilling and Mussina

2015: Johnson, Martinez and Smoltz

2016: Hoffman

2017: None

2018: None (unless you want to count Jamie Moyer as a serious candidate; I don't)

2019: Halladay, Pettitte, Rivera

How would you rank these guys in terms of Hall of Fame credentials? For me, Clemens is clearly at the top but for the PED issue, with Johnson, Martinez and Rivera all clearly guys who will go in on the first ballot.

There will be a pretty substantial drought of serious pitcher candidates after 2019. The only pitcher I see who could retire in the next five years (and thus be eligible between 2020-2024) who has any shot at all is Tim Hudson. So, I think you'll see some of the backlog of eligible pitchers cleared out during that window. Sometime after that, guys like Sabathia and Verlander will come on line, but that's a very long way away.

[russ snyder]

Well, how many tiers are there, and where do you cut off who gets in to the HOF? I think we can all agree that Clemens, Maddux, Randy Johnson and Pedro Martinez were better than Mussina. For me, the next four of that era are (in alphabetical order) Glavine, Mussina, Schilling and Smoltz. Glavine's in the Hall now so no point in debating him further, I guess. I think you can argue the order between Mussina, Schilling and Smoltz any number of ways. For me, I'd put them all in the Hall of Fame, eventually.

But here is what is really going to disturb me: if Andy Pettitte gets voted into the Hall and Mussina does not. Pettitte won't be on the ballot until 2019, but I suspect Mussina still won't have been voted in by then. If the voters want to put Pettitte in, that's okay with me, but not over Mussina. No way, no how.

There really is nobody else who is a contemporary of the pitchers listed above who warrants any consideration (unless you consider Roy Halladay a contemporary, but the prime of his career was a full decade after these guys started their prime years).

The pitcher pipeline (in my opinion):

Already eligible: Clemens, Schilling and Mussina

2015: Johnson, Martinez and Smoltz

2016: Hoffman

2017: None

2018: None (unless you want to count Jamie Moyer as a serious candidate; I don't)

2019: Halladay, Pettitte, Rivera

How would you rank these guys in terms of Hall of Fame credentials? For me, Clemens is clearly at the top but for the PED issue, with Johnson, Martinez and Rivera all clearly guys who will go in on the first ballot.

There will be a pretty substantial drought of serious pitcher candidates after 2019. The only pitcher I see who could retire in the next five years (and thus be eligible between 2020-2024) who has any shot at all is Tim Hudson. So, I think you'll see some of the backlog of eligible pitchers cleared out during that window. Sometime after that, guys like Sabathia and Verlander will come on line, but that's a very long way away.

Really good post on an interesting subject. I think all of the players that you have listed all have Hall of Fame credentials. I think that Pettiite is an interesting case. He somehow gets a pass in the court of public opinion despite his use of PED's. It's probably because of his testimony against Clemens. However, I think that his career should be looked at with the same scrutiny as Clemens. I would be upset if Pettite gets in the Hall of Fame before Clemens.