THE BOOK cover
The Unwritten Book is Finally Written!
An in-depth analysis of: The sacrifice bunt, batter/pitcher matchups, the intentional base on balls, optimizing a batting lineup, hot and cold streaks, clutch performance, platooning strategies, and much more.
Read Excerpts & Customer Reviews

Buy The Book from Amazon


SABR101 required reading if you enter this site. Check out the Sabermetric Wiki. And interesting baseball books.
MOST RECENT ARTICLES
MAIL : You ask | We say

Advanced


THE BOOK--Playing The Percentages In Baseball

<< Back to main

Tuesday, November 18, 2008

HOF 39

By Tangotiger, 12:38 PM

There have been 39 pitchers voted into the Hall of Fame by the BBWAA.  That is one select group of pitchers.  A few tidbits before I say what I need to say.  The last 3 pitchers selected by these guys were all relievers.

The oldest one is Cy Young, born 1867, and the youngest is Eck, born 1954 (87 years apart).  We can see that means that roughly every two years, there is one pitcher the BBWAA thinks is worthy.  14 of those 39 (36%) were born between 1935 (Koufax) and 1947 (Ryan) (12 years apart).  Clearly, voters were impressed with the pitching in the 1960s and 70s.

Anyway, I like to start the era with Bob Feller, born 1918.  Between Feller and Eck, we have 24 pitchers selected in those 37 birth years (and Blyleven will eventually make it 25).  That seems to be a better rate as to what to expect.  Every three years, two pitchers are selected.

Pedro Martinez was born in 1971.  So, in the 17 birth years from 1955 to 1971, we should expect some 10-13 pitchers to be selected by the BBWAA.  Here are the 11 best:


1962 Roger Clemens (Holy Writers notwithstanding)
1963 Randy Johnson
1965 Kevin Brown
1966 Greg Maddux
1966 Curt Schilling
1966 Tom Glavine
1967 John Smoltz
1967 Trevor Hoffman
1968 Mike Mussina
1969 Mariano Rivera
1971 Pedro Martinez

I think we’ve been spoiled here with RJ, Pedro, Clemens, and Maddux’s performances.  Obviously, Mussina and Brown don’t compare, but they were able to hold their own with those four for quite a bit. 

It’s like saying that Tim Raines wasn’t as good a ballplayer as Rickey Henderson.  Well, for the longest while, he was (and possibly better).  He just couldn’t keep up with him in the end.

Being in the shadow of a great, makes you almost as great.  When you are not even in their shadows, that’s when you can dismiss the guy.

Those 11 pitchers are the best pitchers born between 1955 and 1971.  As it turns out, they were all born since 1962.  That gives you 10 birth years that produced 11 of the best pitchers ever. 

That is similar to the 14 pitchers born in the 13 birth years from Feller to Nolan Ryan.

For Mussina and Brown to eventually not be voted in would mean the BBWAA has set a standard that is simply higher than what they’ve been using.

#1    Guy      (see all posts) 2008/11/18 (Tue) @ 14:25

It’s interesting, and somewhat surprising, that the birthyears of 1955 to 1961 produced no Hall-worthy pitchers.  And if you look only at starters, it’s a huge 14-yr gap of 1948 to 1961 (Ryan was born in 1947).  I wonder if this in part reflects a perception problem for starters who began their careers in the 1970s.  It seems to me these pitchers face two hurdles:

1) writers’ and fans’ sense of what a “good ERA” meant was warped by the 1960s low-run environment.  I was a young fan in the late 60s, and grew up thinking that a good ERA meant below 3.00 (comparable to hitting .300).  That was a harder standard to meet in the 70s and 80s, especially in the AL with the DH. 

2) The move to a 5-man rotation, and earlier use of relievers, meant much lower totals for counting stats:  wins, CGs, Ks, ShOs.  So starters in the 1975-1990 era looked like wimps compared to their immediate predecessors.

It took time for people to adjust their standards accordingly.  Ironically, the increasing acceptance of sabermetric analysis arrived in time for the Clemens-Maddux-RJ generation to be properly appreciated, even though they pitched in a still higher run environment than had the “missing generation” of the 70s-80s.  A big post-1993 bump in strikeout rates—with alltime best K/9 rates—also helped these younger pitchers’ greatness to be recognized. 

All of which is not necessarily to dispute that your top 11 may be better pitchers than any starter born in the 1948-61 window.  But it may also be that some in that period have been under-appreciated.  I’d be interested in hearing who you think were the best of that cohort....


#2    Tangotiger      (see all posts) 2008/11/18 (Tue) @ 15:05

ALL starters born 1948-1961, min 3500 IP

1951 Blyleven

then
1948 Charlie Hough
1949 Rick Reuschel
1949 Jerry Reuss
1953 Frank Tanana
1955 Dennis Martinez
1955 Jack Morris

If Dennis Martinez didn’t have his drinking problem, he would have been an easy HOF.  Dude was unbelievable with the Expos. 

But, there you have it.  A bunch of workhorses.  Average win% (with or without Blyleven) is .534.  With about 420 or so “complete games” on average, and if we take the replacment level as .380, then these guys were +.154 wins per game times 420 games or 65 WAR.  So, WAR gray area for HOF is in the 60-70 win range.

Blyleven is clearly THE man in the 1948-1961 birth class, it’s not even funny. 

***

Between 2500 and 3500 innings:
1949 Steve Rogers
1949 Vida Blue
1953 John Candeleria
1956 Bob Welch
1957 Stieb
1958 Hershiser
1960 Viola
1961 Key

These guys probably had better peaks than the workhorses.  They just didn’t get it done in their mid-to-late 30s.  Lots of Cy Youngs and Cy Young votes there.  Probably FAR more than the workhorses, even if you include Blyleven.


Page 1 of 1 pages


Name (required)
E-Mail (optional; WILL be published)
Website (optional)

<< Back to main


Latest...

COMMENTS

May 25 08:11
What sabermetrics is NOT

May 25 06:43
Largest demonstration in Canadian history?

May 25 06:39
Lack of hustle during a game

May 25 02:38
NFLPA lawsuit against collusion

May 25 01:43
Neal Huntington’s best moves

May 24 23:50
Rooting for laundry

May 24 17:04
Firefox, IE, or Chrome?

May 24 12:07
How to beat the shift

May 24 11:11
Incredible story

May 24 09:41
Racial bias in card collecting: not the collectors, but the players on the cards