Mussina Redux
Posted: November 18th, 2008 | Filed under: Baseball | 86 Comments »
I just got an email from Tyler Kepner at the New York Times, who wrote today’s story about Mike Mussina. I bring this up because I mentioned in the last post that, based on the story, I seemed to be sort of an island with my feeling that Mussina is a slam-dunk Hall of Famer. But Tyler says that he got 40 responses from writers, and 32 of them said they would vote for Mussina as a Hall of Famer. That’s more than 75% — which is enough to get him in. And it shows that, actually, lots of people see Mussina the way I see him.
This touches on a larger topic that I started writing in another blog post — I think this has been a very good year for the Baseball Writers Association. Yes INDIVIDUALLY there have been some rather quirky and cranky ballots and opinions, but as a group the voters:
1. Chose Tim Lincecum over Brandon Webb for Cy Young even though Webb had more victories.
2. Chose Cliff Lee over K-Rod for Cy Young even though K-Rod set the saves record.
3. Chose Albert Pujols over Ryan Howard for MVP even though Howard had more homers and RBIs and had a big September and played for a team that reached the playoffs.
I see all of these as promising signs that the BBWAA as a whole is tilting toward more nuanced reasoning and thought. Lincecum had a measurably better year than Webb — so did Johan Santana, who finished behind Webb, but that’s down-ballot and not especially important.
Lee and a whole bunch of other people — including a handful of relievers — had better years than K-Rod.
And Albert Pujols was about 200 times better than Ryan Howard this year. You know, Howard really had a very pedestrian .251/.339/.543 season, and even that was aided by his bandbox of a ballpark. I don’t even think Howard was especially close to being the MVP of the PHILLIES, much less baseball, and I don’t think he should have been anywhere near the second-place MVP. But the point remains: Howard didn’t win. The right guy did. The voters got it right*.
*I guess I shouldn’t say much more until we find out who wins the AL MVP. If K-Rod wins that (or, to a lesser extent, Morneau) then I take it all back.
While we’re here, I would like to make one more point about Mussina. Brilliant reader Thomas offers this thought-provoking comment:
“But my thought about Moose is always this: if you were the opposing team facing him during a pennant race, were you ever frightened that you wouldn’t be able to get to him? He never had that invincible aura about him that the top pitchers of the day (Unit, Pedro, Clemens/Steroids, Schilling, Maddux) had. I know this is a rather weak argument against him, but it fits in there somewhere doesn’t it?“
I think there’s a real point here — sports is fun BECAUSE we do have emotional feelings about people. I can remember precisely how terrorized I used to get when John Elway got the ball with the Broncos down by four in the fourth quarter. And, being a Browns fan and later a Kansas City Chiefs writer, I was right to be concerned — Elway didn’t miss much. But what interests me here is how often our emotional feelings are just WRONG, how often conventional thinking is just WRONG.
For instance, when I read Thomas’ comment I thought — yeah, that sounds about right. Of course, when you compare anyone to Unit, Pedro, Clemens and Maddux — four of the, say, 15 greatest pitchers who ever lived — it’s hard to come out looking good. But then I thought … wait a minute: Is that really true? Did those guys really pitch better in those pennant races? Really?
Unfortunately, I didn’t have time to do some kind of involved sweeping study. But I figured as a test-case, I would take a quick look and see how each of those pitchers pitched in September during their careers.
And, I found precisely what I was looking for: Mussina pitched as well or better than any of those guys.
Mike Mussina in Sept/Oct.: 44-21, .676 winning percentage, 2.86 ERA, 517 Ks, 130 walks.
Randy Johnson in Sept./Oct: 51-17, .750 WP, 2.95 ERA, 790 Ks, 230 walks.
Pedro Martinez in Sept./Oct: 28-27, 509 WP, 3.19 ERA, 496 Ks, 126 walks.
Roger Clemens in Sept./Oct: 53-35, .602 WP, 3.27 ERA, 745 Ks, 261 walks.
Greg Maddux in Sept/Oct: 62-49, .558 WP, 3.42 ERA, 565 Ks, 157 walks.
Curt Schilling in Sept./Oct: 34-25, .576 WP, 3.63 ERA, 494 Ks, 114 walks.
So Mussina has the best September ERA, the second best winning percentage and an outstanding strikeout to walk.
Now, does this prove anything? Of course not. It’s only a snapshot. Every September isn’t a pennant race. Every pennant race game isn’t in September. But I think that, often enough, our image of people is simply colored by, you know, our image of people. Mike Mussina was not celebrated as a dominant and scary pitcher — Thomas is right, he never gave off that aura — but maybe that is our failing. He was pretty damn good, even in September, even without that aura.
Loading ...
…and Moose went crazy in the 1997 ALCS, striking out 25 in 15 innings against only four walks and one run, but not earning a decision.
I wouldn’t get too carried away about the BBWAA. If Howard hit .275 instead of .250 (but with the same OBP and SLG), or struck out 175 times rather than almost 200 (turn those 25 PA into foul popouts to first base), I think he wins. They made the right pick for, I suspect, largely the wrong reasons.
The Lincecum over Webb pick was a pleasant semi-surprise, though, and one that Michael Wilbon flat-out ridiculed on PTI. I was glad I didn’t have anything small but heavy to throw at my TV.
And one of the writers, I believe it is the writer from Milwaukee (who came clean with his ballot, to his credit), voted AP 7th!!!!!
7th!!!!!!!!
and most of those Septembers meant something… other than 1995 & 1998-2000, he was playing for winning clubs, and going to the postseason in most of them (i don’t remember the make-up of the AL East in the early 90s, but the O’s finished 3rd in those years… and then they made the playoffs in 96 and 97 and then he went to the Yanks in 2001, and we all know they made the playoffs every year until this year)
I agree that this has been a good year for the Baseball Writers Association so far. Phil Sheridan, apparently, disagrees:
http://www.philly.com/philly/sports/phillies/20081118_Phil_Sheridan__MVP_voting_is_out_of_whack.html
Love the writing, first time post here.
I’d be curious to see the game scores of each of those pitchers–did Mussina have more games where he was good, while the other pitchers may have had absolutely dominant games thrown in with some really poor outings? Could it be the distribution of dominant/good/poor games that also affects the argument?
Just playing devil’s advocate.
In response to Brilliant reader Thomas, Pedro *was* one of those guys that you feared, but year-after-year it seemed that Pedro and Moose to face each other in big games, and more often than not, the Moose came out on top. I think the fear comes more from the pitchers “stuff” and less from their results. With the exception of Maddux, all of the players you listed were, I’m sure, very uncomfortable at bats. Mussina might not have been, but he sure was effective.
I guess I also disagree with BR Thomas’ basic point about Mussina. Maybe it’s just because I’m a Twins fan, and in the 90’s Mussina was approximately 478 and 0 against the Twins (look it up). But, yeah, in his pre-Yankees days, he was one of a handful of guys that you just wouldn’t want to see going against your team. Not on the same level as the guys BR Thomas mentioned (other than Schilling), but the guys BR Thomas mentioned (other than Schilling) are 5 of the 10 or 12 greatest pitchers of all time. Thankfully, that’s not where the bar is set.
Sorry, 4 of the 10 or 12.
I was going to say what Jeremy did, which was that after watching him help the Orioles whip the Mariners in the ‘97 playoffs, I learned to fear the guy plenty.
The BBWAA has been excellent with the voting so far this year, besides a few crazy votes.
In the Grady Little Game, it was Mussina who saved the day when Roger Clemens choked.
It doesn’t matter if people THINK they should fear a guy or what. What matters is how he produces.
Go to BR and check out Pujols’ top 10 similar batters thru age 28
…case closed…
lets not forget the three BBWAA writers who voted non-rookie Edison Volquez for NL rookie of the year, the Newark Star-Ledger’s Jeremy Cothran, the Los Angeles Daily News’ John Kilma, and the North County Times’ Jay Paris.
Don’t be too sure Joe. The people that wrote into him are not a random sample and therefore can’t be relied upon as a gauge of the population. These people had some kind of reaction to the article, and are therefore more likely to write in to the guy. Yes, he’s probably a HOFer, but he may not go first ballot.
All due respect to reader Thomas, but I get the feeling he’s talking about Yankees-era Mussina. In a mild twist on his question, I can confirm that as an Orioles fan in the late 1990s, the first thing I did when the dates/starters of playoff series came out was figure out when Moose was going to pitch. In my young, fanhood-influenced mind, I counted Moose starts as likely wins and proceeded to think about the rest of the series accordingly.
Look specifically at the 1997 AL Division Series, Baltimore vs. Seattle, Mussina vs. Johnson, games 1 and 4. That’s when I, a Seattle resident and Mariner fan (though it took years after my move here in 1981 to let go of the Red Sox), learned to appreciate Mussina. He doesn’t look too bad in comparison.
Wow, Phil Sheridan thinks the Nats screwed Howard out of a few MVP points. And where does Phil work? Yeah, that would be Philadelphia. And he proudly doesn’t vote for any of the awards, while reaping all the professional benefits of the BWWAA, and criticizing those who DO vote.
Great link, Mark. What a maroon this guy is.
Here, let’s say that someone comes to Charlie Manuel and says, hey, Tony LaRussa and Walt Jocketty are frat-house drunk right now, and you could trade Howard for Pujols straight-up. Does he:
A) sign the papers so fast his pen catches fire
B) skip around the room humming “We’re off to see the Wizard” and then signs
C) misses his chance to sign because he’s fainted from joy
D) signs but the misses all of 2009 because he’s too busy giggling like Frank Gorshin’s Riddler
With Rollins, Utley, and Victorino in front of him, and Werth and Burrell behind him, Big Al would either have 170 RBI or 170 walks. Maybe both.
Nightfly:
I agree, although I would note that Walt Jocketty has been the GM in Cincy for about a year now and I am pretty sure that the Cards upper management would be pretty ticked off if he traded their best player.
Just about any Twins fan can and will attest that Moose’s aura of intimidation is plenty good.
Here are his career B-R splits vs. the Twins:
22-6, 786 WP, 3.09 ERA, 186 K, 53 walks
Also, 6 CG and 4 SHO
I remember Game 1 of the ALDS in both ‘03 and ‘04 being a pressure-cooker for Santana and the bullpen while Mussina went 7 both times, despite losing.
http://www.baseball-reference.com/pi/psplit.cgi?n1=mussimi01
Moose has also DOMINATED the Royals:
18-7, 3.00 ERA, 152 K, 37 BB in 246.1 IP.
Whenever he was on the hill vs the Royals I was scared for KC.
MM
until they give out brownie points for 4th place teams you can’t have a mvp from that team. they would have finished 5th w/o him? Baseball needs to have 2 awards, 1 for mvp and 1 for the best player or just stop giving it “valuable” players on 4th place teams. As far as Mussina, he should be in H.O.F.
Mussina never got the credit he deserved. Sure people would get “scared” of the Big Unit but he beat him twice in the playoffs in 97 – back when Seattle was a great team. He pitched 15 innings against the Indians (in the game that clinched the series for Cleveland he pitched 8 innings gave up a hit and struck out 15) and dominated them completely. People remember Schilling’s bloody sock but don’t remember that Mussina had a perfect game through 61/3 of the first game of the series and beat Schilling. And yeah in the game against Oakland when he pitched 7 shutout innings people remember Jeter’s “play” but forget that it was Mussina who got them out of the elimination game. If he was a dancing clown like Josh Beckett he probably would get more respect as a big game pitcher.
Maybe it’s the writers’ failing, ESPN’s failing. That he’s never been “pimped,” that nobody ever asked a player, “Are you scared s**tless to face Moose tonight?”, etc. Maybe the joke is on us and that the AL thought, in September, “oh crap, Moose is pitching tonight, we don’t stand a chance,” not because of his stuff, or because of his story, but because those numbers Joe points out were in the heads of the players.
That’s why emotion is usually wrong, and we can’t go on what we or the media “thought” the player’s value is/was . . .
i agree that pujols was the MVP. i can live with that. the 18 to 12 margin of first place votes is probably fair. i have a problem when people say howard didnt deserve it. he had 30 more RBIs than Pujols. If i had any command over elementary math, i could tell you thats a whopping percent…for guys with the same function in the lineup(as oppose to lead off). howard scored more. which is essentially baseball to me. produce and score. and yeah, citizen bank is small, but finished like 11th in homers this year. thats normal. burrell hit a lot more homers away. so again, pujols fine. that ramerez nonsense is a joke. im pretty sure howard led the NL in rbis the time of the trade, led at teh final, and had a monster sept.
I had no idea the Twinkies were so scared of Moose.
In my defense, I don’t think the “fear factor” is anywhere near the end-all, be-all of a pitcher’s HOF case.
Yes, I’m thinking mainly of his most recent years (with the Yanks), b/c I’m a Sox fan so that’s what’s in my head most clearly. As the division race closed, and in the playoffs during the last few years, if the Sox faced the Yanks, and Mussina was going, in my mind he was always a notch below Clemens. But, like others have pointed out, it’s no shame to be considered merely a step below a man who was in the argument for greatest pitcher of all time.
I’m not going to argue with the results, because more often than not, Mussina pitched very well, or at least well enough. Maybe we were all wrong in our assessment of him not being an intimidating pitcher.
I just thought him NOT being an especially intimidating pitcher may take away from his HOF case with the voters. It probably shouldn’t, but like Joe said, that image of a person still holds sway in many of us.
God, I love these arguments. And baseball.
I think we can all agree that Mike Mussina belongs in the Hall of Relatively Fear-Inducing.
I wouldn’t read that Phil Sheridan link unless you want to be horrified and angry the rest of the day. It’s that bad.
Another way to look at it is to look at how many HOFers are really worthy across generations. Generally speaking, if you look at HOF pitchers and the decades that defined their careers, voters typically pick about 6 per decade (1970s saw the most with about 10). In looking at this, I also divided up certain players into two decades and assigned each 1/2 per decade where their careers overlapped more than one 10 year period.
The 80s were pretty light with Nolan Ryan, Eck, Sutter, and Gossage, but even three of those guys (Ryan, Eck, and Goose) made part of their reputations in the 70s (Ryan and Goose) and 90s (Eck). Given that, the 80s probably had about 2.5 HOFers, which goes up when you add in Clemens dominance during that decade (assigned 1/3 of a decade since he was also dominant in the 90s and this decade).
The 90s HOFs look like Roger, Unit, Maddux, Pedro, Glavine, and Hoffman, but even most of those guys overlapped into the 00s. You could also argue for Smoltz and Schill, but I still think that Moose still looks better than those guys.
After all is said and done, the 90s represent about 3.3 HOFs (Roger/3, Unit, Maddux, Pedro, Glavine, and Hoffman each divided by 2, plus 0.5 from Eck). Given that, there is certainly room for Moose given that he was as good as any of them on any given day and had the stats, dominance, and longevity along with it.
Really, though, I’m just happy that Joe called me a brilliant reader. I can cross that off my life’s to-do list.
Oh and I forgot to mention that he pitched in Camden Yards for half his career where ‘rioded up players like Mo Vaughn etc. could take full advantage of the small ball park against Mussina. He pitched through the ’90s with a 3.5-3.7 ERA in the AL which is an accomplishment. Mussina was never a power pitcher like Clemens, Unit etc. (he was built more like Pedro) but yet had a good fast ball. He could’ve gone against his body like Pedro M. but then would not have have been relatively injury free like he has been. I think he is the only pitcher who came close to having a perfect game on 4 seperate occasions – not to mention the times when he could’ve had no-hitters. I believe he was always clean – unlike Clemens. I hope he comes back for a couple of years to get his 300 wins. That will solidify his place as one of the best ever.
The BBWAA had a respectable voting year until someone voted Jason Bartlett 5th in the MVP ballot.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHA
OK, I’ll stop now…
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHA
Alright, now I’m really done.
It will be so interesting to see the HOF voting for pitchers who pitched during the last ten years. I’ll bet that “…and he pitched to all these guys on steroids!” will become a very common rationale for voting for pitchers. At the same time, “I think that guy was one the juice,” will keep out a lot of hitters.
Is there any reason to believe that PED use wasn’t just as common among pitchers as hitters?
To me, the most important lesson of the post steroid era (as typified by Brian Roberts) is : We have absolutely no idea who did or did not do steroids. I don’t really care who did or didn’t, but it matters to a lot of people who have HOF votes.
I grew up in DC and watched Moose early on into his prime, and he was one of the best pitchers I ever saw in the first two times through the lineup. He was beatable if you got to him in the first five batters or if you left him pitch into the seventh, but in between he was untouchable, not in the Randy/Pedro way, but closer to the Maddux/Radke/Smoltz mold of precision and movement that caused headaches.
He’s one of those pitchers where the batters always left the plate thinking they should have found him but didn’t. I think that’s as destructive in the opposing dugout as facing a guy like Pedro – you can fool someone who still has hope.
Moose might be the victim of a certain New York bias in that his career in Baltimore was certainly Hall of Fame (avg ERA+ 133) but his career in NY has been more like Hall of Very Good (115).
If he had started his career in NY and moved to Baltimore in 2001, I think baseball fans in general would see Moose as an obvious, no-doubt-about-it lock for the Hall of Fame.
Moose doesn’t have any indicators that would lead you to think PEDs, he had a typical career arc. This year he pitched inside more often and used more movement on his fastball and more sliders/cutters to get better results. That, and they called his curve for a strike, for many years they wouldn’t happen.
If a pitcher gained velocity suddenly late in his career, I would think about PEDs, but there’s no stat to jump out at you like home runs, because even strikeouts can happen with a new pitch or better control of the ones you already have.
Shouldn’t people start wondering about Nolan Ryan? We don’t really know about anyone in the past 30 years since Brian Downing got all muscley and resurrected his career with weight training. I think pitchers tend to not want to bulk up, but certainly, it could help a lot with other forms of training as shown by Clemens. Mostly it seemed to help relief pitchers to recover.
I obviously like the phillies, so theres my NL east flavor, but of all the “maybe” names mentioned, i think Smoltz is already a sure bet hall of famer. you can get into deserving later. but i think the voters like a good story as much as anything else (see: the anti-mussina). The writers (i dont mean this as judgementally as it’s coming off) will love the sheer gimmickyness of the wins and save stats that he has accumulated. And even if the atlanta trio dont all retire in the same year, the writers will still like that golf partners/hall of fame buddy storyline.
Schilling on the other hand doesnt deserve it, but he makes for an interesting for the priorities of voting. He carried three huge underdogs deep into the playoffs, his most dominating performance perhaps being the one they lost (see: mitch williams)
Gate:
You’re right. I figure, if a Juiced Hitter homers off a Juiced Pitcher, is there any injustice there?
Of couse, I’m also one of those who questions how effective PEDs actually are…
Yeah LLarry, look at Canseco. Sure he had a few great years, but he missed even more games than you would expect, so what’s the point of bulking your body past the point the natural structure can take? You still need some skills to hit in the first place, it’s not all bat speed as a fellow like Pedroia will indicate.
Clemens regained a very good fastball with that workout, it’s not like he went back to the exploding 98 mph fastballs of his 20s doing them. I suspect the spiltter he developed had almost as much to do with things.
Small Hall or Big Hall, right? He clearly does NOT fit in a Small Hall. He is no Unit, Pedro, Maddux or Clemmens.
But Mussina clearly fits in the Hall of Fame. It doesn’t even have to be a Big Hall. He was one of the top 10 (or thereabouts) pitchers of his generation, and there should certainly be at least 10 pitchers from each generation in the Hall, as it currently exists.
I like Mussina, but I want to throw out a counter argument: It’s all about peak v. average.
In Mussina’s best ERA+ was 163, and that was in the strike shorted 1994 season. Baseball-Reference lists the top 500 ERA+ season, cutting off at 149. Mussina has two (2) of them, none in the top 50.
# Pitcher
9 Clemmens (3 in top 50)
9 Maddux (2 in top 50)
8 Unit (3 in top 50)
6 Pedro (5 in the top 50)
4 Schilling (0 in top 50)
The big four here (Clemmens, Maddux, Unit and Pedro) had lot of great seasons, and multiple unbelievably great seasons. Schilling had twice as many great season as Mussina (by this measure) and no unbelievably great seasons.
And that is why there was never the fear. He — like Schilling, or Pettitte (2 in the top 500, 0 in top 50), Peavy (2 and 0), Cone (2 and 0), Tom Glavine (2 and 0) and others — never was one of the all time great best pitchers ever. Not even for a single season. He was a mortal, though a really really good one.
(By the way, Walter Johnson had 9 in the top 500, with 4 in the top 50.)
If my scanning is correct, only three catchers since 1931 have led their leagues in the computation that is win shares. (And certainly no catcher before then ranked first.)
1970, Johnny Bench, 34 win shares, 1 more than Tony Perez, won MVP.
1997, Mike Piazza tied with Tony Gwynn, 39 ws, finished second in the MVP voting to Larry Walker (33 ws). (Walker got ink by hitting .398 at the All-Star break. He also averaged .346 on the road.)
2008, Joe Mauer, 31 ws (2 ahead of Morneau), finish 4th to Pedroia (26).
I became a big fan of Mussina when he made the all-star team and Cito didn’t use him so he got up and started warming up anyway. I stopped being a fan when he became a Yankee, but I loved his Oriole years.
Hey Nightfly, here’s an FYI for you to spy: A “maroon” is an escaped slave, quite a different thing from the “moron” you no doubt meant for the biased Philthy Phan in your post.
(PosCheers all around for the ongoing blog, Joe–you are magnificent. And also quite brave for your willingness to involve the ELECTION OF BARACK OBAMA YEAH! in your philosophical meanderings. We love you on Long Island, & will gladly make you some homestyle huevos rancheros if you are ever in the Bay Shore area and are hungry.)
Don’t these players always say they’d trade all their Most Valuable Hardware for a ring? Well, isn’t that just what happened?
And beat writers haven’t EVER changed. Really.
Another point about Moose early on – he had a good hitters park and craptacular defenses other than Cal – Leo Gomez, Billy Ripken, and Randy Milligan were his regular infielders early on with Mark Mclemore and David Segui taking over later. He was also an institutional casualty for a couple years stuck behind a series of dead veterans (Valenzuela, Sutcliffe, Moyer, Sid Fernandez) and the overinvestment in Ben McDonald and Gregg Olson. He really didn’t take over until 1995 when McDonald was hurt, and even then the O’s brought in Kevin Brown.
I can’t wait for the post where Pos does that thing where he puts two astonishingly similar yet anonymous players’ stat lines next to each other, and then at the end reveals that one is Curt Schilling, and the other is John Smoltz. Then he’ll contemplate why Smoltz has a considerable advantage over Schilling in the poll. He’ll conclude that both were great pitchers, both with arguable cases for the HOF.
Should be any day now…
@ PHIL GURNEE:
You became a Mussina fan when he showed what a jackass he was? Judging by everything I’ve heard, Gaston told Moose he was being saved in case the game went into extra innings. When it became clear the game wouldn’t go that way, he decided to get up on his own, which (of course) led to the hometown crowd booing Gaston for the slight. It was a clear case of a guy trying to show up a manager.
That didn’t bother me so much as when he complained that a game in Toronto (in which he was scheduled to start) was delayed for 15 minutes or so so the Jays could pay tribute to the late Tom Cheek, mentioned a few posts back as the voice of the Blue Jays. THAT was classless. If some player came into Baltimore and griped that they were going to have a ceremony for Chuck Thompson before the game, I’m sure you’d agree that that player was a grade-A ass.
WHO THE HELL VOTED FOR JASON BARTLETT?!?
@Brian Griffin
I’m sure Nightfly is quoting Bugs…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E8gsaDdqGzA
Josh made the point about the 2003 ALCS. In a game seven between the two storied rivals featuring three hall of fame pitchers, Moose easily had the best night.
I have been a fan of his since he was with Stanford against Florida State back in 1989 or 1990. He is probably my favorite non-Nole, non-Royal of all time.
And man would he be a great number three behind Meche and Greinke.
Joakim Soria.
I know this is off topic (completely), but, Joe, I need you to write about Joakim Soria.
Use the power of your mighty pen.
The Royals have to take this chance.
Ryan Dempster is the proof:
*multiple pitches
*not a max effort closer
*not a “one excellent pitch” guy like Mariano
worst case scenario? send him back to the ‘pen
best (and VERY possible) case? maddux, glavine, smoltz. hudson, mulder, zito. these guys took weak/average offenses to the playoffs.
gil is in his prime. greinke likely has two years left in blue–max.
The Royals Have Not Had A Better Chance In Two Decades. Don’t you have to try? It’s not a sure thing. But. don’t. you. have. to. try?
more home runs and les norman.
Not a bad collection of outcomes, but is there really any evidence to support the notion that things are getting better? Can we get a breakdown of the voting by age, to see if the next generation of voters is giving us consistently better votes than the previous?
I wasted a lot of electrons defending Mussina as an “ace” when he first transitioned to the Yankees, but it’s not immediately clear to me that a hall with Moose as the best pitcher buying a ticket to get in would be too small.
How many pitchers to we need ahead of him in the queue before we start to doubt his case? Spun slightly differently – if we put in 30 players during the 15 years he is eligible, does that mean there should be six starting pitchers? do we already have that many?
“does that mean there should be six starting pitchers? ”
Six is kind of drunk. 10 might be more reasonable.
Why isn’t Pedro in the poll? I’m awaiting his retirement so I can start looking into hotel reservations for his induction ceremony!
Re: Ray Saiyed and perfect games.
I’m surprised it took so many comments to get to the perfect games. Didn’t the Moose take two into the 9th? Imagine if he just made one of those happen, much less both. There’s be statues of this guy already. He’d have a reality show.
Also, I wonder how much more invincible he would have been portrayed if writers didn’t always see him doing crossword puzzles in the locker room. That had to tone down the overpowering in their prose and pump up the guile angle.
So with all this HOF pitcher talk … what about Kevin Brown? Brown is not getting anywhere near the HOF, but look at his core numbers: 3,256 IP, 127 ERA+.
That’s 300 innings shy of Mussina with an ERA+ 4 points better. Brown had an exceptional peak with a 210 ERA+ with the Marlins in ‘96 and 3 other seasons with an ERA+ at or above 150 and more than 230 IP. He lead the ‘97 Marlins and the ‘98 Padres to the World Series and was the best player those years on both of those teams. He was somewhere between sensational (98 NLDS, started games 1 and 3, 14.7 IP, 21 K’s, 1 run) and dreadful (97 World Series, 11 IP, 10 runs) in the postseason those years. People remember his 2004 ALCS start, but that was the old, washed up Kevin Brown who would post a 65 ERA+ the next year. Overall his postseason resume is 81.7 IP, 4.19 ERA.
So to summarize, Brown is a deserving HOF candidate, who had a brilliant peak and enough career length to have similar value to Mussina. He did intangible things like lead his team to the World Series and perform brilliantly in the playoffs at times (even if people weren’t paying enough attention to small market teams to notice), and was an intimidating top of the rotation starter.
Honest question I’ve wondered about for Joe or anyone else.
If Mussina had the exact same numbers in every way except that he threw 99 and hit a few guys on purpose, would he be a first ballot hall of famer?
I’m being honest. I think Joe hits on a very good point that PERCEPTION can color peoples thinking, and when you’re talking about writers voting based on their opinions (some take it very seriously, others, let’s be honest, don’t, and will avoid voting for a guy based on personality, or their perceptions, or whether their dinner agreed with them last night or not), it can really be a problem. If Mussina was a “feared” pitcher like Pedro (and please don’t misunderstand me, Pedro in his prime was one of the best pitchers ever and was clearly better than Mussina at that time, that’s not the argument I’m making), would he be a sure thing? Maddux I think is similar…look at some of those numbers, yet if he was short of 300 wins, I don’t think he’d ever be mentioned in the same breath as Clemens, Pedro, and Johnson, whether it’s deserved or not.
I’m interested in any input on that…what do you guys think? Do you think there’s an inherent bias toward “power” pitchers that give them a little extra push? That’s not to say that Clemens, Pedro, and Johnson don’t deserve to be Hall of Famers, as they clearly do. I just wonder if Mussina would be considered more of a sure thing if he threw harder and hit a few guys (even if every single statistic, ERA, Wins, WHIP, strikeouts, everything was exactly the same).
My reading of Tyler Kepner’s piece on Mussina is that “Of the 40 writers who responded to an e-mail message from The New York Times about Mussina, 17 said they would vote for him, 8 said they would not and 15 said maybe.” If “maybe” is 50/50, that’s 61% for Mussina.
Who are these people in the poll that won’t vote for Schilling, Mussina, and Hoffman to be in the HOF? These guys aren’t even close in this JoePo poll, but I voted for all three of them.
GINKC – indeed, I was quoting the Bugs on that. Good catch. I wish my fellow Lawn Guy Lander would have picked up on that.
Now, that Walt Jocketty thing? Yeah, that was pretty bad. Thanks Brent.
Kyle,
I agree that perception all-too-often becomes a determining factor in the HOF vote. You have Jim Rice sitting on the doorstep and that’s based as much on memories of him being “feared” as on his actual contributions (he was a very good player, and hats off to him for utilizing Fenway to his advantage, but away from home, he was basically Greg Vaughn). Jack Morris also benefits from his rep as a “big-game pitcher” with his case mostly relying on 10 innings one night in October, 1991.
Moose was underrated during a lot of his prime, back when winning 20 games seemed to be the be-all and end-all for the BBWAA, finishing lower than he should have in Cy voting on several occasions but, I would argue, not a LOT lower (curiously, he benefited from stone-age BBWAA thinking in ‘96, when he came fifth with a 4.81 ERA and 1.37 WHIP).
I don’t think you could argue that Maddux would be in the same boat if he hadn’t hit 300 wins, though. If you look at his career from ‘92 to ‘98, MAN, those are some numbers. ERA+ numbers ranging from 166 to 271. There was a lot of talk about him being among the best ever back in the late 90s, and that seemed to follow him throughout his career, both before and after he reached the 300 win plateau. His peak was SO MUCH better than Mussina’s that it’s hard to view them in the same context.
Joe already made the “win shares” comparison between Marichal and Mussina. For what it’s worth, here are other comparison.
For each player on the poll, I’ve listed their career win shares, my idea of a HofF presumption for that position in the field, a comparable player who is in the Hall, and a comparable player who is not. “Comparable” gets stretched here or there.
Maddux 395 (300). Lefty Grove 391, Tony Mullane 399.
R. Johnson 327 (300). Nolan Ryan 334, Bert Blyleven 339.
Glavine 315 (300). Carl Hubbell 305, Tommy John 289.
Bonds 714 (380). G.H. Ruth 756, Pete Rose 547.
Smoltz 288 (280, hybrid). Eckersley 301, Kaat 268.
Thomas 406 (400). Eddie Murray 437, Darrell Evans 363.
Mussina 274 (300). Jim Bunning 257, Jack Quinn 287.
Hoffman 165 (200). Mariano Rivera* 201, Lee Smith 198.
Schilling 254 (300). Don Drysdale 258, Jack Morris 225.
Hey, you convinced me (a BoSox fan, no less!) – good analysis.
You might even mention that Mussina’s lone balk came during his first season, in, I believe the tenth game he started; zero balks in the 17 years and 526 games he started after that one.
Phenomenal.
ha that’s baseball for you. That’s a pure a stat you can get. no balks. I’m not sure it should convince me of anything or means anything, but it certainly is interesting.
” He never had that invincible aura about him that the top pitchers of the day had.”
I am actually going to have to disagree with this statement. Although fans might argue that he does not have the same aura of other great pitchers, I think the players feel differently. I will never forget an interview with Alex Rodriguez in 1998 (the same year as his 40-40 season). Upon being asked who he thought was the most intimidating pitcher in baseball, the guy he never wants to face, he responded with “Mike Mussina of the Baltimore Orioles.” I agree that the Moose’s presence is not one of a frightening nature (probably due to his subdued, intellectual approach), but I do think it’s important to consider what the batters think, and over time, he has clearly been at the top of the list of pitchers that you don’t want to face.
JUSTIN —
While I won’t dispute your version of the events about complaining about a tribute to Tom Cheek since I honestly don’t remember that, I will stand up for Mussina in the All-Star Game controversy.
The All-Star Game was in Baltimore. Shock of all shocks, we wanted to see our hometown Birds in the game. Cito Gaston telling Moose that he wasn’t going to pitch unless it went to extras was a slap in the face to those of us who went to that game. We wanted to see Mussina in the All-Star Game. By about the 7th inning, we were asking each other, when the hell is Mussina coming in this game and we were getting pretty ticked at Cito. By the 9th, the crowd was pretty angry with Gaston (the Jays and the O’s had some bad blood back then) and Moose brought it all to a head. We got to see what we wanted: Moose pitching. Even if it wasn’t in the game.
I felt Gaston was being a jackass to the fans of Baltimore. Mussina just helped us ram the point home. I was angry and felt ripped off even before Mussina stood up to warm up.
Jenny –
Alex also reportedly likes the she-male, muscular type, and is running around with Madonna. Not the 1986 Rolling Stone version of her, but the 2008 divorced mother who turned 50 this past August…maybe he’s not the most reliable judge of character?
I’m just saying..
If memory serves Mussia beat Randy Johnson twice in 1997 ALDS. I developed an entirely rational fear of Mike Mussian that year.
I think we’ve made a compelling case that Mussina deserves a reputation for being a big-game pitcher as much as many pitchers who have such a reputation.
And that, my friends, is why we go with the stats and not our memories.
Going by ERA+, Kevin Brown had the 20th best season of all time and three more in the top 224. He had a better career ERA+ than Mussina and a better peak. So why isn’t he getting more love for the HOF?
I contend that it’s because fame comes a *lot* from pitching in big cities. Do great in New York and then you get more fame than you deserve. Do great in San Diego, Florida, and Texas, not so much. Do I think Moose deserves HOF entry? Yeah, I’m persuaded by those September numbers (although I think Blyleven is miles ahead of Mussina). FWIW, Kevin Brown in September/October had an ERA of 2.93, his only month under 3.00. So given that some of Brown’s games were in pennant races, and September was the best month of his career in the most important stat, why doesn’t Brownie get more – oh, must be confusing him with the other Brownie. Never mind.
By the same token, Blyleven, who already has one of the best postseason records (drastically better than Morris; people remember Morris’s one shutout, not all the games he lost, including one to Blyleven) had his only two months with an ERA under 3 in August and September. So yeah, he was pretty clutch, more than clutch enough to get into the HOF. It’s a travesty, really. You can point at Mussina and then point at several pitchers that did what he did and say they are in the HOF. But you can’t point at any other HOF eligible pitcher who did what Blyleven did in innings, shutouts, complete games, strikeouts, who isn’t in the HOF. And he did his best pitching in the pennant race months. A travesty, I tell you. And it seems to be the New York guys who are leading the charge against Bert. Good baseball does get played outside of the Eastern time zone.
From River Ave. Blues:
“Mussina finishes his career with a record 100 games over .500 (117 games to be exact), something only 20 other men have accomplished. Of those twenty, 16 are in the Hall of Fame. The other four (Clemens, Maddux, Glavine, Pedro) will be some day. Moose should one day make it 21 for 21.”
I posted the same thing in the other Mussina thread, but I think it bears repeating here. Interesting comparison (stats from baseball-reference.com):
Marichal: 11 times All-star (started game twice)
Mussina: 5 times All-star (never started)
Marichal: 1 time top 10 Cy Young voting (finished 8th)
Mussina: 9 times top 10 Cy Young voting (all in top 6)
What to make of that? I’m not sure. How can someone be an annual All-star but not a Cy Young competitor, while the other was not often an All-Star but frequently in the Cy Young discussion?
Was Marichal an excellent player on poor teams, while Mussina was an excellent player on great teams? And how does that impact our definition of “Fame”?
Seems like there’s something here for folks smarter than I to dig into further…
Kevin Brown is somewhat overrrated by ERA+. He also gave up a ton of “unearned” runs (as compared to Mussina, who gave up fewer than almost any other pitcher). These runs are a direct result of his being an extreme sinkerball pitcher, just like they would be for a knuckleballer whose pitches resulted in a lot of passed balls.
Unearned Runs/Total Runs Allowed
Mussina – 101/1559 6.47%
Brown – 172/1357 12.68%
Maddux – 225/1981 11.36%
Schilling and Pedro also have excellent ratio’s – this has a lot of hidden value and could be a factor in a pitchers winning percentage being better (or worse) than expected.
Anyway, I have watched Mussina his entire career and believe he easily meets Hall of Fame Standards. Another neat moment that nobody has mentioned yet is when Mike fanned Sosa and McGwire on 6 swinging strikes in the 1999 All-Star Game (following the summer of you know what in 1998). All six strikes were fastballs. Allthough everybody refers to Mussina’s craftiness, he had a great fastball 1992-2003 and he threw it a lot – more than Clemens certainly during that period
Here’s what I would have to say about Mussina. I took my nephew to Fenway Park when he was 8 years old and Mike Mussina was pitching for the Orioles that day and he was already the ace of their staff and pitched well. My nephew is now 25 years old and doesn’t remember being at the game. When I watched Mussina this past year the guy physically looks the same as the day I saw him pitch 17 years ago and his performance was not that far off. I don’t think he was ever the best pitcher in the game but he was always amongst the best. He is similar to Maddux in the fact that he was pitching artist who never relied on pure stuff ( though I suspect he stuff was better than people gave him credit for). I think he is like the pitching equivalent of Al Kaline. Probably one of his biggest drawbacks is the fact (and it may hurt him for the HOF) is that he avoids the media spotlight, Most people have never even seen him interviewed even though he has pitched for the Yankees for 8 years. I think that affects the perception of him along with the fact that he pitched in the AL during a very offensive era. Pedro Martinez is the greatest pitcher that I ever saw ( and I remember Gibson at his best but never saw Koufax) and is probably the greatest ever. Not being as good as Pedro, Maddux, and Clemens is not a reason to exclude someone from the HOF.
I think Mussina should be in, but what about Bert Blyleven??? Blyleven has more wins (287) and more strikeouts (3,701) than Mussina. While we’re on the topic, what about Andre (The Hawk) Dawson? The 1977 National League Rookie of the Year and the 1987 National League Most Valuable Player deserves some love in 2009.
If Mussina is the Blyleven of the 90s, then Blyleven is the Ron Santo of the 80s.
Amen, Andrew, re Blyleven and Santo.
Kevin S., there is an explanation for Marichal’s absence from Cy Young lists. Consider that Marichal began pitching outstanding seasons in 1962.
From 1962-1966, there was only one Cy Young Award (for both leagues), cutting in half the chance that a pitcher would be recognized.
From 1962-1970, the 20 voters cast first-place votes only. That made it unlikely that anyone would finish 4th, 5th, 6th, etc.
During that time, there were great seasons by Koufax, Gibson, Drysdale, Seaver, and Dean Chance’s 1964. In 1963, 1965, and 1966, Koufax got all 20 votes. In 1968, Gibson got all 20 NL votes. In 1969, Seaver got 23 of 24 NL votes.
Marichal was to Koufax/Gibson/Seaver/Carlton as Smoltz has been to Pedro/Clemens/Maddux/Johnson. Well, a more overpowering Smoltz on one of Marichal’s good days. After age 33, Marichal’s injuries put an end to his run (in that respect, he was like Pedro).
Another worth noting WRT AS games versus CYA votes: many players have better second halves than first halves. Mussina, as noted, had his best month of the season in September/October. So it’s quite possible that a guy who is at his best when the chips are down (or when the weather is hot) would get consideration for the end of season awards without being selected for the All Star Team.
As for Santo, while I agree he deserves HOF entry, he does not make my top five all time best at third base. He’s not ahead of Schmidt, Brett, Boggs. If ARod is a third baseman, he’s not ahead of him. Wright seems likely to pass him. And that’s not looking at the old timers, for whom third base tends to be an under represented position (which is part of why I’d pick Santo). But if you’re selecting a pitching staff from just HOFers, Blyleven deserves some consideration for about the third or fourth team. IP. Eight of his ten most comparables are in the HOF including the top three, and a ninth, Tommy John, has the most wins of any pitcher who won’t get into the HOF. Only four of Santo’s most comparables are in the HOF, including none of the top three (Dale Murphy, Ken Boyer, Gary Gaetti). At best, Santo would be an average HOF batter per baseball-reference.com; his highest career ranking is in 22nd GIDP, hardly a positive. Blyleven is top ten all time in Ks and Shutouts, and whether you like or dislike the proliferation of strikeouts, you have to admit that for pitchers, shutouts are pretty damned important. Yes, Santo hit in a bad time for hitters, but most of Blyleven’s career was facing the DH, so it sort of evens out. Santo not being in the HOF is a mistake. Blyleven is a travesty.
@Brian Griffin: What GINKC said re Bugs Bunny. Also, “maroon” in your definition is capitalized. (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/maroon)
Back on topic: I posted this in the first Moose thread; since this thread is more current, let me repeat it:
Moose is actually 7th in all-time AL wins (Johnson, Clemens, Plank, Wynn, Grove, Ruffing, in order ahead of him).
And, Joe, I am surprised you didn’t do this while you were researching at BB-Ref: if you neutralize their stats, you get this:
ERA
Marichal 3.22
Mussina 3.25
WHIP
Marichal 1.176
Mussina 1.111
W-L/Pct
Marichal 230-148/.607
Mussina 247-161/.605
There really isn’t a dime’s worth of difference between them statistically — so why was Marichal considered a mortal lock for the HoF when he retired, and we are all here debating whether Mussina should even be in the conversation?
As for his crankiness, I think Kyle Litke correctly described it as a lack of patience with stupid questions (I know how he feels). Wallace Matthews makes a similar point in today’s Newsday:
http://tinyurl.com/5a5h7v
He gets my vote (if I had one).
David in NYC, I lived in NYC once.
I notice Wallace Matthews isn’t sure he’d vote for Mussina. Me, too, I’m not sure. I’m crusading for Blyleven first.
Why was Marichal considered a mortal lock? Marichal’s peak was higher than Mussina’s. ERA+ seasons of 169, 168, 167, whereas Mussina’s three highest are 163, 157, 145. It’s not that easy to cite particular games, but Marichal engaged in a few spectacular duels.
Marichal was superb for eight years, through age 31, and then his last five seasons, after injury, were below league average. Mussina was very very good (in a dh league) for a dozen years, and has allowed more hits than innings pitched for the last five.
Their careers may be equivalent, but Marichal’s games or years of brilliance made a bigger impression on us. Mussina may be just as worthy.
Hi David in Toledo –
Well, unfortunately, I cannot say I have ever lived in Toledo (although I did once spend two days in Maumee — does that count for anything?).
As to why Marichal was, at the time, considered so much more highly than Mussina, in his time, is an interesting question. I had a conversation with my best baseball buddy on that topic earlier today; one of my suggestions was that there were fewer teams and other sports, so (at least relatively) he seemed more dominating.
Plus, he did do several things that attracted a lot of attention: his first game (a 1-hit, 12-K shutout), the 16-inning game with Spahn, hitting John Rosbero over the head with a bat, etc. But as far as their numbers go, their reputations should be pretty much the same — so why aren’t they?
‘Tis a puzzlement.
Two days in Maumee does not count for much. Theodore Drieser lived there — as a moocher — for at least part of the time while he was writing Sister Carrie.
Your points about Marichal are a good complement to mine. Worthiness (earned) and reputation (bestowed) are not always in sync. . . .
[...] Posnanski said so three times! Once, twice, thrice. He is my favorite sports writer so everyone should definitely listen to [...]
aw c’mon, what’s the mystery here, it’s the higher peak plus the legkick