Mussina does not make my HOF ballot

[El Gordo]

A pitcher that starts 40 games and pitches 300 innings is more value than a pitcher that starts 33 games and pitches 200 innings. It isn't complicated.

That makes no sense in todays game No pitcher will start 40 game or ever pitch 300 innings. Are you saying that Hoss Radbourn is a better pitcher than Pedro because he won on average 33 G, 32 CG, 299 IP, when pitching mostly underhand in 1880-1890?

[MurphDogg]

Fact: The Major league stabilized on the 5 man rotation in 1975. 39 years ago.

No starter has been voted into the HOF with as few innings pitched as Pedro in those 39 years.

First, the five man rotation didn't completely stabilize until the early 1980's. And second, prior to this season no starting pitcher had been elected to the Hall of Fame whose career started after 1975, so every other pitcher in the Hall of Fame pitched with a four-man rotation for at least part of his career.

[wildcard]

First, the five man rotation didn't completely stabilize until the early 1980's. And second, prior to this season no starting pitcher had been elected to the Hall of Fame whose career started after 1975, so every other pitcher in the Hall of Fame pitched with a four-man rotation for at least part of his career.

Madduz? Glavine?

[MurphDogg]

Madduz? Glavine?

Reading? Comprehension?

[MurphDogg]

First, the five man rotation didn't completely stabilize until the early 1980's. And second, prior to this season no starting pitcher had been elected to the Hall of Fame whose career started after 1975, so every other pitcher in the Hall of Fame pitched with a four-man rotation for at least part of his career.

Madduz? Glavine?

I should have said year instead of season, but you could have parsed this out based on the context.

[wildcard]

That makes no sense in todays game No pitcher will start 40 game or ever pitch 300 innings. Are you saying that Hoss Radbourn is a better pitcher than Pedro because he won on average 33 G, 32 CG, 299 IP, when pitching mostly underhand in 1880-1890?

The comparison was Koufax to Pedro.

[wildcard]

I should have said year instead of season, but you could have parsed this out based on the context.

OK. Good point. Amazing that more starters have not been inducted.

[crawjo]

There can be no doubt that Pedro is a significantly more worthy HOF candidate than Sandy Koufax ever was.

[atomic]

Pedro was a crappy pitcher once he turned 34 and was injury plagued. That is why he had low career innings pitched. I don't know why the 5 man rotation is being brought up.

[crawjo]

OK. Good point. Amazing that more starters have not been inducted.

The 1980s had very few viable candidates. Dave Stieb might have been the best pitcher of that decade. The really transcendent talents ike Dwight Gooden fizzled for one reason or another. It really puts into context why guys like Martinez, Mussina and Schilling are so deserving. After you get past Maddux, Clemens and Johnson they are right there as the best pitchers of the last 40 years or so.

[crawjo]

Pedro was a crappy pitcher once he turned 34 and was injury plagued. That is why he had low career innings pitched. I don't know why the 5 man rotation is being brought up.

Pedro tried to pitch through various injuries and ineffectiveness; Koufax retired. Koufax had been out of the game for four years by the time he was 34.

[crawjo]

That makes no sense in todays game No pitcher will start 40 game or ever pitch 300 innings. Are you saying that Hoss Radbourn is a better pitcher than Pedro because he won on average 33 G, 32 CG, 299 IP, when pitching mostly underhand in 1880-1890?

Indeed, one could criticize Walter Johnson by saying, "A really good valuable pitcher throws over 600 innings in a season." Context is everything when it comes to pitching.

[El Gordo]

Pedro pitched 18 seasons , Koufax pitched 12. Koufax had 6 brilliant seasons where he averaged 22-8, 272 IP, 156 ERA +, 0.970 WHIP, 9.6 K/9. Pedro had 8 brilliant seasons where he averaged 16-6, 238 IP, 193 ERA+ 0.974 WHIP, 11.0K/9. So are you saying given the difference between eras, steroid vs the best pitching era, Koufax and Pedro can't be mentioned together?

[25 Nuggets]

Pedro pitched 18 seasons , Koufax pitched 12. Koufax had 6 brilliant seasons where he averaged 22-8, 272 IP, 156 ERA +, 0.970 WHIP, 9.6 K/9. Pedro had 8 brilliant seasons where he averaged 16-6, 238 IP, 193 ERA+ 0.974 WHIP, 11.0K/9. So are you saying given the difference between eras, steroid vs the best pitching era, Koufax and Pedro can't be mentioned together?

Ah, the old Pedro vs Koufax debate resurfaces...

About a decade ago, Koufax was an untouchable legend, kind of like how Joe DiMaggio was once referred to as "the greatest living ballplayer" so many times that people believed it. When Pedro was being his dominant self, folks were offended by the notion he had a better peak than Koufax. He was a classic case of "I saw him pitch and he was the greatest thing since sliced bread blah blah blah", whereas people who were born later wonder if he was overrated.

All I can say is, Pedro's peak years were better relative to league average than Koufax. Gordo's bold text says it all. Koufax pitched in an extreme pitcher's environment, surpassed only by the deadball era. Pedro pitched in the most extreme hitting environment in history. In my opinion, they both did what was asked of them to a similar degree of excellence based on league conditions. Pedro pitched longer, but those years aren't what will usher him into Cooperstown.

[wildcard]

Maddux, Glavine, and Randy Johnson meet a standard of at least 300 wins, 4000 innings pitched and 2 CY Young awards for the 5 man rotation era that Pedro does not meet. Whether that influences enough voters to not put Pedro in on the first ballot is an open question.