Friday, November 21, 2008

Elect Moose 2.0

I just updated the "Elect Moose" post I wrote back in early August and posted it over at my second site, Elect Mike Mussina. I also posted something about what Pete Abe just wrote about Moose and why he's going to vote for him come election time. Feel free to check it out.

Peace, love and Pinstripes,



Larry Wayne Jones said...

First of all I am not necessarily a Mussina or Yankee hater, but I really think the HOF needs to draw the line on who gets in. There have been many questionable choices in recent years (Bruce Sutter anyone?). I really just can't trust baseball writers who actually give HOF votes to guys like Hal Morris (5 votes in 2006), Jim Eisenreich (3 votes in 2004), Jim Deshaies (1 vote in 2001) etc. Who are the writers who actually vote for these guys?? Seriously. Who does this. You have a vote for the HOF and you choose Hal Morris? Are you freaking kidding me??Anyway, Mussina finally won his 20 games, won some gold gloves and made 5 or 6 all star teams in his career, but never led the league in any major statistical category, and never won a Cy Young. Once he got to the Yanks, was he ever even the best pitcher on his team? No. Excellent player for a long time, never got hurt,and 270 wins is nice, but he never, ever dominated enough to win any major awards. The HOF should be for the best of the best, not guys who were really good.

Shelley said...

Well Chipper...I mean obviously haven't followed Mussina's career very closely. If you had, then you would know that Mussina was one of the most dominant pitchers in the AL in 2001. You would also know that Mussina was the best pitcher in the Yankees rotation in 2001 (as well as in 2008). He should have won the AL Cy Young award in 2001. With the exception of win/loss record and number of home runs allowed, all of his major stats in 2001 were better than his Yankees teammate Roger Clemens, who won the award. Meanwhile, his run support was more than 2 full runs less that what Clemens got.

Every other pitcher who finished his career at least 100 wins over .500 is in the HOF. Mussina finished his career 117 games over .500. That alone should be enough to get him into the HOF.

J-Boogie said...

Jeff, err, I mean Larry Wayne. I agree with you 100% about the HOF voters. They do some curious things. I think Walt Weiss got a vote. It's nonsense and it cheapens the honor.

I have to agree with Shelley here. Moose was among the best of the best and I think you're not as familiar with him as we Moose fans are. You and I will definitely be discussing this more I'm sure, especially afer I author a post that breaks down why Moose is/was a better pitcher then Tom Glavine.

ps- LWJ and I work together and he likes to bust my balls. i already sense that he's coming around to Moose's "hall-worthiness." He'll be a convert sooner than later.

Larry Wayne Jones said...

Um, Shelly, Larry here...I don't necessarily think you can make the argument that Mussina "should" have won the CY in 2001. I understand he had better stats than Clemens in every category except for W/L and HR allowed, but he also finished behind guys like Mulder, Freddy Garcia, AND Jamie Moyer in the CY voting. I just think the HOF should be based on a career of excellence, not just one season where a player "should" have won a major individual award and did not, regardless of statistics.
I also totally understand that you and J-boogie may be biased as Yankee fans, which is totally reasonable, as I am biased on many of my favorite Atlanta Braves. That being said, there is no way that Mussina and Glavine can be compared as HOF worthy, simply based on the fact that Glavine reached the golden 300 win mark, which according to baseball writers, is automatic for HOF induction. Glavine also won 100 more games than he lost, but the 300 win total trumps all according to HOF voters.
Regarding Mussina, I think you have to compare him to Bert Blyleven, based on career #'s. Taking into account that Blyleven made more starts(different era of the 70's where guys routinely started 40 games in a season). Blyleven had a lower ERA than Mussina(3.31 to 3.68) and had 37 more shutouts(60-23). I don't dispute the fact that Mussina may eventually get elected to the HOF, but he is in no way a first ballot guy. If he gets in, then Blyleven has to be in as well, and I don't think Blyleven is a HOF'er...I'm only saying that the writers shouldn't elect guys who were very good, but not great, for long careers. I'm not taking anything away from Mussina, but you can even make the argument between Mussina and Jack Morris (both had 5 all star appearances, Morris was top 10 in CY voting 7 of 10 consecutive years, but never won, Mussina 8 of 10 years). However, Morris has 2 rings, which shouldn't matter but somehow does. Would you think Jack Morris is HOF material?

J-Boogie said...

Larry, Larry, Larry. I agree with you about 2001. Mussina definitely had a better year then Clemens, but maybe wasn't deserving of the #1 spot when you compare his year to Mulder, Garcia, and Moyer.

I agree with you also that HOF should be based on a career of excellence, which is exactly why Moose should be a lock for the hall. A career winning percentage of .636, bested by only 3 current HOFers and by only 2 future HOfers (Big Unit and Clemens). 33rd on the all-time win list, behind 5 non-HOFers. 19th on the all-time K list, behind 2 non-HOFers. Only 6 current HOFers have better k/9 ratios. He owns the AL record for most consecutive seasons with at least 10 wins. And he's 117 games over .500. Everyone that can lay claim to being 100 games over .500 is in the HOf or are on their way.

As for the 5 guys ahead of him with more wins that aren't in the OF, 2 are from the 1800s so you can't really compare them. Blyleven won 287 in 685 career starts. Tommy John won 288 in 700 career starts. Jim Kaat won 283 in 625 career starts. Mussina started 536 games in his career. Moose may not have won as many but definitely would have if he hung around for 4 more years, ie Tom Glavine, who by the way had less wins after 18 seasons that Mike.

As for Blyleven's ERA being lower than Moose's, that's a by-product of the ERA. Moose's ERA was .73 points below the league average for his career. Blyleven's was only .59.

As for Jack Morris, close but no cigar. Not as close as Moose.