2019 Hall of Fame Ballot

[msgkings322]

Oh good, intelligence insults. Always the last resort of someone who has no counter-argument.

No you pansy, you don't even know how you are being insulted LOL

This is a sports board, we come here to give opinions. Someone wins an MVP vote and we then argue back and forth if they deserved it. If we think the voters got it wrong we say so, often in an exaggerated and humorous way. We call for them to lose their vote, or leave the country, or we insult their mothers. Then some other poster disagrees with us and they insult our mother and call us gay. Then we argue about something else.

Yes, my opinion is that anyone who doesn't vote for obvious no doubt HOFers doesn't deserve a vote. That's my opinion and it's better than yours. And your mom is fat.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

If he hung around for 3 mediocre seasons to hit 300 wins, was he any better simply because he hit a big milestone? I wouldn't say so.

And his dominance is mediocre compared to who, guys like Pedro, Maddux and Clemens and Johnson? Mussina was the AL's best pitcher in 2001 and arguably the second best pitcher in multiple other seasons (1994, 1995 and 1999), so I don't think because his dominance wasnt as good the guys who are possibly among the top 10 pitchers ever, he's not a HOFer.

Your first point is the difference between better player and better career. The HOF is more about player than career. So yes Mussina would have been better if he had 30 more wins.

Milestones imo are the best to measure careers.
If you work at a job for 24 years does anyone care??? But that 25th you are likely having a huge party.

But I guess at milestones we can agree to disagree.

After milestones, I look at how dominant a player was during their best seasons. And I just don’t see much dominance for mussina. Again I see him no better than a top 5 AL pitcher during his best days. You bring up 2001, which was a pretty weak year in the first place. But he was still CY #5. Sure lots of that is due to having the CY on the same team. But I would argue he did not have the best season(although it is very close). He didn’t have the best ERA, nor the most wins, nor the most innings. But the advanced stats say he had the best.

I am not a fan of the advanced stats like WAR, ERA+ or FIP, they all prioritize certain things too much. WAR emphasizes innings pitched, FIP emphasizes strike outs and ERA+ emphasizes league averages and ballpark factor.

All in all, I like making my own analysis using the old fassioned stats.

So again that is an Agree to disagree.

What does make his close imo is that he had such a long extended prime.

But I am unsure if that is good enough.

You also bring up that he pitched same time as some legends. And claim that that should not hurt his case. But I disagree with that too.

 

[broncosmitty]

No you pansy, you don't even know how you are being insulted LOL

This is a sports board, we come here to give opinions. Someone wins an MVP vote and we then argue back and forth if they deserved it. If we think the voters got it wrong we say so, often in an exaggerated and humorous way. We call for them to lose their vote, or leave the country, or we insult their mothers. Then some other poster disagrees with us and they insult our mother and call us gay. Then we argue about something else.

Yes, my opinion is that anyone who doesn't vote for obvious no doubt HOFers doesn't deserve a vote. That's my opinion and it's better than yours. And your mom is fat.

She's also fat.


And Barry Bonds might be the only guy I'd vote for until he gets in. Clemens is a fuckface, Im cool with him getting in when he's dead.

 

[Gopherfan84]

Edgar Martinez
Curt Schilling
Mariano Rivera

Honestly, I'm not sure anybody else really deserves it beyond that. Mussina, Halladay, Pettite, Vizquel are Hall of Very Good to me. The obvious names omitted are for obvious reasons.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Edgar Martinez
Curt Schilling
Mariano Rivera

Honestly, I'm not sure anybody else really deserves it beyond that. Mussina, Halladay, Pettite, Vizquel are Hall of Very Good to me. The obvious names omitted are for obvious reasons.

I can see your point mussina, visquel and pettitte. Also on the steroid people.

But if those are the omitted then how is curt schilling and Edgar martinez not in the hall of very good too.

And think you are way off on Halladay. He is a top 10 pitcher of our time(80s to 2010s)

 

[wazzu31]

Edgar > Rivera

 

[StanMarsh51]

Your first point is the difference between better player and better career. The HOF is more about player than career. So yes Mussina would have been better if he had 30 more wins.

Milestones imo are the best to measure careers.
If you work at a job for 24 years does anyone care??? But that 25th you are likely having a huge party.

But I guess at milestones we can agree to disagree.

After milestones, I look at how dominant a player was during their best seasons. And I just don’t see much dominance for mussina. Again I see him no better than a top 5 AL pitcher during his best days. You bring up 2001, which was a pretty weak year in the first place. But he was still CY #5. Sure lots of that is due to having the CY on the same team. But I would argue he did not have the best season(although it is very close). He didn’t have the best ERA, nor the most wins, nor the most innings. But the advanced stats say he had the best.


.

.

Who was better in 2001? It's not like there was one guy who led the league in every category to be the best.

If there was a guy better than Mussina in category X in 2001,he was worse in most other categories (hence not having a better season). Clemens and Mulder had more wins, Garcia had a slightly better ERA, Buehrle had a slightly better WHIP etc, but they all trailed Mussina in most other categories. Heck if you wanna know how much of a joke that voting was, Jamie Moyer got more Cy votes than Mussina despite being worse in everything except record.

 

[navamind]

a reliever isn't more HOF-worthy than Halladay

lol

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Who was better in 2001? It's not like there was one guy who led the league in every category to be the best.

If there was a guy better than Mussina in category X in 2001,he was worse in most other categories (hence not having a better season). Clemens and Mulder had more wins, Garcia had a slightly better ERA, Buehrle had a slightly better WHIP etc, but they all trailed Mussina in most other categories. Heck if you wanna know how much of a joke that voting was, Jamie Moyer got more Cy votes than Mussina despite being worse in everything except record.

Freddy Garcia had more Innings pitched, lower ERA and more wins... But less Strike outs and a higher WHIP...

again the point was that you said he was the best... I see it being close between a bunch of guys... some with more wins, others with better ERA... and whatever....

 

[MilkSpiller22]

a reliever isn't more HOF-worthy than Halladay

lol

IDK... of course i think they are both first balloters... But Mariano has the BEST EVER title... Halladay doesn't...

 

[wazzu31]

IDK... of course i think they are both first balloters... But Mariano has the BEST EVER title... Halladay doesn't...

Mariano was the first, not the best. No one says Cy Young is the best pitcher even though he was the first to be allowed to win 500 games.

 

[StanMarsh51]

Mariano was the first, not the best. No one says Cy Young is the best pitcher even though he was the first to be allowed to win 500 games.

So which closers had better careers than Rivera?

It's not as if Rivera merely compiled his saves....he was dominant for 15+ years..as a closer (from 1997 on, he had a 2.02 ERA, 0.97 WHIP, 4.5 K/BB over 1100 innings).


Regardless, I wouldn't put him over Halladay since a great starter is always worth more than a great reliever.

 

[StanMarsh51]

Freddy Garcia had more Innings pitched, lower ERA and more wins... But less Strike outs and a higher WHIP...

again the point was that you said he was the best... I see it being close between a bunch of guys... some with more wins, others with better ERA... and whatever....

Garcia also had a worse BB/9, hence much worse K/BB when you combine it with his worse K/9.

I know you don't like ERA+, but Mussina beat him in that as well (no denying that Safeco is very pitcher friendly).

And while you mention that WAR is influence by innings pitched, Mussina had a much better WAR despite pitching 10 less innings (Mussina also led the AL in WAR).

They both had the same amount of quality starts, although I've always thought that was a bs stat because a 4.50 ERA isn't 'quality.' If you were to up the standard to 7 innings, 3 ER or better, then Mussina has 21 of those starts compared to Garcia's 18.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Garcia also had a worse BB/9, hence much worse K/BB when you combine it with his worse K/9.

I know you don't like ERA+, but Mussina beat him in that as well (no denying that Safeco is very pitcher friendly).

And while you mention that WAR is influence by innings pitched, Mussina had a much better WAR despite pitching 10 less innings (Mussina also led the AL in WAR).

They both had the same amount of quality starts, although I've always thought that was a bs stat because a 4.50 ERA isn't 'quality.' If you were to up the standard to 7 innings, 3 ER or better, then Mussina has 21 of those starts compared to Garcia's 18.

im not sure what your point is now... if you want to say Mussina was the best AL pitcher in 2001. you have to admit that there are valid arguments for others to be the best too... and therefore no clear cut BEST.... and either way you look at it... that is just the AL... there were better seasons in the NL... So he was STILL not the best pitcher in 2001 whichever way you look at it...


I never said he was a bad pitcher... I just don't like his HOF case since:

1. His longevity never hit any milestones
2. His 162 game average is MEDIOCRE compared to other HOF candidates
3. His Dominance is MEDIOCRE compared to other HOF candidates

Never a CY award winner, Only had 1 season with BELOW a 3.00 ERA


IMO, the only argument he has is that he had an extended prime(He was CONSISTENTLY VERY GOOD)


If i made a rotation of 10 pitchers who pitched MOST of there careers from 1990-2010, Mussina would not be in my top 10 Starters... would he be in yours?? Not sure if he would be in my top 20...

 

[Chewbaccer]

I just hope Andruw Jones and Billy Wagner can stay on the ballot.

 

[StanMarsh51]

If i made a rotation of 10 pitchers who pitched MOST of there careers from 1990-2010, Mussina would not be in my top 10 Starters... would he be in yours?? Not sure if he would be in my top 20...

Career wise, absolutely top 10.

For sure, Clemens, RJ, Maddux and Pedro are at the top. Next tier contains Schilling, Smoltz, Mussina, Glavine, Halladay, Brown.

You mean to tell me that other than the above, there may be 10 more guys ahead of Mussina who played largely from 1990-2010? Seems like a major stretch.

 

[StanMarsh51]

2. His 162 game average is MEDIOCRE compared to other HOF candidates
3. His Dominance is MEDIOCRE compared to other HOF candidates

Pitcher A - .638 win%, 3.68 ERA, 1.19 WHIP, 2.0 BB/9, 7.1 K/9, 57 CG
Pitcher B - .615 win%, 3.44 ERA, 1.30 WHIP, 3.0 BB/9, 5.4 K/9, 52 CG
Pitcher C - .579 win%, 3.33 ERA, 1.18 WHIP, 2.6 BB/9, 8.0 K/9, 53 CG

Pitcher A is Mussina, pitcher B is first ballot HOF Glavine through the same # of innings, and pitcher C is Smoltz. Glavine hung on for a few more mediocre years to get 300 wins, and Smoltz's numbers are helped a bit by being a relief, where it's easier to post low rate stats.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Pitcher A - .638 win%, 3.68 ERA, 1.19 WHIP, 2.0 BB/9, 7.1 K/9, 57 CG
Pitcher B - .615 win%, 3.44 ERA, 1.30 WHIP, 3.0 BB/9, 5.4 K/9, 52 CG
Pitcher C - .579 win%, 3.33 ERA, 1.18 WHIP, 2.6 BB/9, 8.0 K/9, 53 CG

Pitcher A is Mussina, pitcher B is first ballot HOF Glavine through the same # of innings, and pitcher C is Smoltz. Glavine hung on for a few more mediocre years to get 300 wins, and Smoltz's numbers are helped a bit by being a relief, where it's easier to post low rate stats.

And glavine had a couple better BEST seasons...

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Career wise, absolutely top 10.

For sure, Clemens, RJ, Maddux and Pedro are at the top. Next tier contains Schilling, Smoltz, Mussina, Glavine, Halladay, Brown.

You mean to tell me that other than the above, there may be 10 more guys ahead of Mussina who played largely from 1990-2010? Seems like a major stretch.

I dont have mussina in that second tier... not even close... Smoltz, Glavine, Halladay, and Brown had ELITE seasons... Mussina really didn't...

 

[MilkSpiller22]

and i would easily take Santana over Mussina... Santana might not have the Longevity, but his dominance was elite!!!