Mussina does not make my HOF ballot

[POR]

Well ok I get that the number value of different eras ERA isn't directly comparable for many reasons so I now see that. But win totals, innings pitched and strikeouts, etc., would seem to be. I think the dh was only in play during the middle to latter part of Kaat's career but he also had to bat before the dh which required additional energy and wear and tear. So I do think he is similar to Mussina in that he pitched a long time was the best at fielding his position and was a very good pitcher just not quite as outstanding when compared to Gibson, Koufax, seaver, Palmer, Marichal, Bunning, etc .

When you are comparing Kaat to Mussina it is important to note that Mussina retired in 2008 after a very good year (20-9 3.37 era and 1.22 whip) while Kaat's played seven year after his last decent year in 1976.

I made the same point when discussing Pedro Martinez , but I think HOF voters greatly inflate the importance of players hanging on for a years where they are mediocre but increase their counting numbers.

The point was made earlier in the thread that Glavine got in the first ballot with 92% of the vote and Mussina only got 20% of the vote. However, their numbers are pretty similiar. It is reasonable to assume that if Mussina wanted, he could of pitched another 3 or 4 more years, got over the magic 300 win total and exceeded Glavine's win total. If Mussina had the pitched for a few more years even if he was average, Mussina's percent of the vote would be much closer to Glavine and that does not make any sense to me.

[Redskins Rick]

I

No it doesn't because despite all that 3.45 era ( and he even pitched longer and still managed a better ERA ! ) To me that is a better gauge. That metric doesn't change.

Stop cherry picking your metrics.

But, if you want to pick on ERA, remember this fact:

2. ERA career is 3.68. However, AL East average for that ERA is 4.53. Glavine is in the HOF, and with a 3.54 ERA in a non-DH National League spot.

[Redskins Rick]

When you are comparing Kaat to Mussina it is important to note that Mussina retired in 2008 after a very good year (20-9 3.37 era and 1.22 whip) while Kaat's played seven year after his last decent year in 1976.

I made the same point when discussing Pedro Martinez , but I think HOF voters greatly inflate the importance of players hanging on for a years where they are mediocre but increase their counting numbers.

The point was made earlier in the thread that Glavine got in the first ballot with 92% of the vote and Mussina only got 20% of the vote. However, their numbers are pretty similiar. It is reasonable to assume that if Mussina wanted, he could of pitched another 3 or 4 more years, got over the magic 300 win total and exceeded Glavine's win total. If Mussina had the pitched for a few more years even if he was average, Mussina's percent of the vote would be much closer to Glavine and that does not make any sense to me.

He is using Kaat, because he can't find any other pitcher to compare to, not in the HOF.

He is also hung up on the magic 300, and a majority of the pitchers in the HOF, don't meet that magic number.

Most would agree that 300 is out the window with 5 man staffs and deeper bullpens.

[Can_of_corn]

Well ok I get that the number value of different eras ERA isn't directly comparable for many reasons so I now see that. But win totals, innings pitched and strikeouts, etc., would seem to be. I think the dh was only in play during the middle to latter part of Kaat's career but he also had to bat before the dh which required additional energy and wear and tear. So I do think he is similar to Mussina in that he pitched a long time was the best at fielding his position and was a very good pitcher just not quite as outstanding when compared to Gibson, Koufax, seaver, Palmer, Marichal, Bunning, etc .

Would you say the stikezone today is larger then it was 10 years ago?

Before you say no, I have proof that it is.

Would it not be easier to strike out guys now then it would be 10 years ago?

Strikeouts are not directly comparable for era.

Neither are wins or innings but it is harder to explain why and I have a headache.

[Frobby]

Would you say the stikezone today is larger then it was 10 years ago?

Before you say no, I have proof that it is.

Would it not be easier to strike out guys now then it would be 10 years ago?

Strikeouts are not directly comparable for era.

Of course, Ryan's strikeouts are even more impressive when you consider that league-wide K-rates were significantly lower when he played than they are today (though, of course, K-rates were lower still in the years before Ryan pitched).

[Old#5fan]

He is using Kaat, because he can't find any other pitcher to compare to, not in the HOF.

He is also hung up on the magic 300, and a majority of the pitchers in the HOF, don't meet that magic number.

Most would agree that 300 is out the window with 5 man staffs and deeper bullpens.

Where did you get that I am hung up on the "magic" 300 wins? Palmer had fewer than 300 and he is the best Orioles pitcher of all time.

[Malike]

It's probably been said at some point in these 29 pages, but had Mussina been a life long Oriole and ended up with the exact same numbers, I'm pretty sure everyone here would be furious if he didn't get in the Hall.

[25 Nuggets]

Of course, Ryan's strikeouts are even more impressive when you consider that league-wide K-rates were significantly lower when he played than they are today (though, of course, K-rates were lower still in the years before Ryan pitched).

Look up Dazzy Vance.

K/9 innings

1922 (1st)

1923 (1st)

1924 (1st)

1925 (1st)

1926 (1st)

1927 (1st)

1928 (1st)

1929 (2nd)

1930 (2nd)

1931 (1st)

1932 (3rd)

----

career (233rd)

It's all about playing environment.

[Nigel Tufnel]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>Why Mike Mussina deserves to be in the Hall of Fame. <a href="http://t.co/40ZBp2FCld">http://t.co/40ZBp2FCld</a> via <a href="https://twitter.com/SportsonEarth">@SportsonEarth</a></p>— Dan Duquette (@danduquette) <a href="

">January 4, 2015</a></blockquote>

<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

[25 Nuggets]

Simply put he was a great pitcher. I'm willing to say that even though he broke my heart as a fan. He used to be my avatar back in the day.

He could go toe to toe with any ace and win.

[srock]

Simply put he was a great pitcher. I'm willing to say that even though he broke my heart as a fan. He used to be my avatar back in the day.

He could go toe to toe with any ace and win.

My little league windup was modeled after him. Well, it was Dave Steward first, then Mussina. I lived in the Bay Area '89,'90', and '91

Then he signed with the enemy. Innocence lost.

But the numbers don't lie. He was better then Smoltz and Glavine. In my perfect world, Mussina goes in 2nd ballot, Glavine 3rd, Smoltz 4th. Something like that.