OFFICIAL 2018 MLB THREAD

[I've seen black diamonds!]

Biggio is the fifteenth-best second baseman in MLB history by WAR, just behind Sandberg and ahead of Robinson. I don't understand why he's controversial in some folks' minds.

Lou Whitaker ahead of the lot.

https://www.baseball-reference.com/l.../jaws_2B.shtml

[Danno]

Compelling arguments for sure. I just don’t want it to turn into the NFL hof where so many get in.

Considering NFL teams have 22 starters and well over 40 on the roster, the NFL HoF has never seemed to me to be too permissive. :shrug:

I mean, he's like top of the class in the hall of very good, but no one feared Mussina on the mound ever.

Neither you nor I faced him, so neither of us are in a position to say. But 8 seasons where you got significant CYA votes seems to dispute the notion that he wasn't "feared".

Lou Whitaker ahead of the lot.

https://www.baseball-reference.com/l.../jaws_2B.shtml

Yep. Bobby Grich too (who beats Lou on JAWS but Lou edges him on career WAR).

[Self Jupiter]

Considering NFL teams have 22 starters and well over 40 on the roster, the NFL HoF has never seemed to me to be too permissive. :shrug:

Also shorter average careers. Less stats driven sport. I am guilty of romanticizing the MLB hof and comparing all others against it.

A few recent selections I have a hard time with - Brian Dawkins, Terrell Davis, Bill Polian / Tony Dungy etc

[AdironRider]

Wasn't Mussina always like 5th on the list except for one year?

I'm not trying to knock the guy down, he was very good for a very long time. But I do think advanced metrics have made him look better than anybody thought he was, after the fact, as no one gave a shit about WAR when he was playing. There is some truth to both sides IMO.

[ex-powderbroker]

baseball has always been a game where your eyes can deceive you, it’s exactly why people care about something like on base percentage more than batting average these days.

also, mussina pitched ten years on the .512 birds to waste a pretty amazing 130+. to say he wasn’t feared has more to do with a creaky cal ripken and the nobody’s than his talent.

[Benny Profane]

Wasn't Mussina always like 5th on the list except for one year?

I'm not trying to knock the guy down, he was very good for a very long time. But I do think advanced metrics have made him look better than anybody thought he was, after the fact, as no one gave a shit about WAR when he was playing. There is some truth to both sides IMO.

Well, then, good for advanced metrics. Just think of the hundreds of great players buried with undeserved bad reps.

For instance, he really impressed me in his late career with the Yanks, coming in as mid reliever at times and masterfully, especially in the playoffs. Didn't get the headlines, but you know the other dugout said, aw fuck, him?

[Benny Profane]

baseball has always been a game where your eyes can deceive you, it’s exactly why people care about something like on base percentage more than batting average these days.

also, mussina pitched ten years on the .512 birds to waste a pretty amazing 130+. to say he wasn’t feared has more to do with a creaky cal ripken and the nobody’s than his talent.

Yeah, the Orioles really sucked when he was there.

[Danno]

Wasn't Mussina always like 5th on the list except for one year?

I'm not trying to knock the guy down, he was very good for a very long time. But I do think advanced metrics have made him look better than anybody thought he was, after the fact, as no one gave a shit about WAR when he was playing. There is some truth to both sides IMO.

His finishes in CYA voting: 4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 2, 6, 5, 6 So I was wrong, it's actually 9 top-6 finishes. But it is true that 8 of them are in spots 4-6 (although he finished 5th in 2001, but should have won as he was clearly the best pitcher, and should have finished higher than 4th in 1992). Still, I disagree with your general view. First, you have to be excellent to finish top 6 that many times. Second, when he went to the Yanks, it wasn't just a ho-hum Yanks got another good player reaction. It was more like, "FUCK! The Yanks got Mussina?!?!?" While it is true that advanced stats have helped him, people who were paying attention to baseball and not just the popular winning teams were well aware that he was one of the best in the league. And he was so for a very long time.

[AdironRider]

Look, like I said, being a top 6 guy for 10 years is pretty damn impressive, but at the same time he was like a cut rate Maddux or Glavine. He never ranked higher than 13th in WAR in any season of his career.

He also had a losing record in the playoffs at 7-8, averaging 3.4 ERA and like 6 strike outs a game in ones that matter. Dude was a master of consistency but was never dominant.

[Danno]

Look, like I said, being a top 6 guy for 10 years is pretty damn impressive, but at the same time he was like a cut rate Maddux or Glavine. He never ranked higher than 13th in WAR in any season of his career.

He also had a losing record in the playoffs at 7-8, averaging 3.4 ERA and like 6 strike outs a game in ones that matter. Dude was a master of consistency but was never dominant.

According to Baseball Reference he had 11 years in the top 10 for WAR for pitchers (including a year at #1) and 5 years in the top 10 for WAR for all players.

Interesting that you compare him to Glavine. According to Baseball Reference, he has a higher career WAR than Glavine. Also a better ERA+. Moose was every bit as good as Glavine, if not better. Glavine pitched 850 more innings and got 35 more wins, that's really what separates them. And I might add, with that additional 850 innings, he still didn't top Moose's WAR total.

I'll grant you that Moose doesn't compare to Maddux. Very few do. If Maddux is the HoF standard -- as Brock seems to think and maybe you do too -- then there's no argument, Moose doesn't belong (nor does Maddux's 2 famous teammates, Glavine and Smoltz).

[AdironRider]

According to Baseball Reference he had 11 years in the top 10 for WAR for pitchers (including a year at #1) and 5 years in the top 10 for WAR for all players.

Interesting that you compare him to Glavine. According to Baseball Reference, he has a higher career WAR than Glavine. Also a better ERA+. Moose was every bit as good as Glavine, if not better. Glavine pitched 850 more innings and got 35 more wins, that's really what separates them. And I might add, with that additional 850 innings, he still didn't top Moose's WAR total.

I'll grant you that Moose doesn't compare to Maddux. Very few do. If Maddux is the HoF standard -- as Brock seems to think and maybe you do too -- then there's no argument, Moose doesn't belong (nor does Maddux's 2 famous teammates, Glavine and Smoltz).

Weird, ESPN doesn't say that, but I wasn't calculating it with just pitchers. It really annoys me that there are multiple different ways of calculating it, and I believe BR's is different. Which kinda hurts the concepts validity IMO.

I'd be fine holding Glavine and Mussina out of the hall ultimately. They never scared me but I think Glavine's peak was better.

I do think Smoltz being dominant at two separate "positions" (closer and starter) was pretty awesome. I also liked Biggio for similar reasons. Dude was pretty awesome as a catcher, 2nd baseman, and center fielder. On the flip, he was also very much like Mussina with being very consistent but never the "best".

[I've seen black diamonds!]

Yeah, the Orioles really sucked when he was there.

This is the key. On better teams he would have won more games and received much more hype. Mussina was a better pitcher than Tom Glavine. A top guy for a long time.

Edit to add: Biggio was a poor second baseman for about a decade.

[Danno]

Weird, ESPN doesn't say that, but I wasn't calculating it with just pitchers. It really annoys me that there are multiple different ways of calculating it, and I believe BR's is different. Which kinda hurts the concepts validity IMO.

I'd be fine holding Glavine and Mussina out of the hall ultimately. They never scared me but I think Glavine's peak was better.

I agree, it is annoying that there are different methods (Fangraphs and BR, I guess ESPN pulls from Fangraphs?). It certainly is an inexact science, but it's the best we have.

I happen to believe both Glavine and Moose belong, but couldn't argue with those in favor of a very small Hall, where they're both out. I think Glavine benefits from the mystique of being on those very good Braves teams for so long. And his win total also benefits from that (and correspondingly, his awards total too).

[Benny Profane]

This is the key. On better teams he would have won more games and received much more hype. Mussina was a better pitcher than Tom Glavine. A top guy for a long time.

Edit to add: Biggio was a poor second baseman for about a decade.

It's why so many want to play for the Yankees. Your odds of going to the post season and just national exposure day to day is so much better. Ichiro was hoping for a ring at the end, didn't quite make it.

[irul&ublo]

I agree, it is annoying that there are different methods (Fangraphs and BR, I guess ESPN pulls from Fangraphs?). It certainly is an inexact science, but it's the best we have.

I happen to believe both Glavine and Moose belong, but couldn't argue with those in favor of a very small Hall, where they're both out. I think Glavine benefits from the mystique of being on those very good Braves teams for so long. And his win total also benefits from that (and correspondingly, his awards total too).

Are you fucking serious that there is even a question on Glavine?

[Danno]

Are you fucking serious that there is even a question on Glavine?

Maybe you should actually read the discussion before ranting at me.

[Brock Landers]

Tom Glavine won 2 cy youngs, top 3 4 other times, led the league in wins like 7 times (wins are not reflective blah blah I know) and won a title. And 300 games. He combines the peak being excellent (Mussina doesn’t have this) with a long steady good career even if the end wasn’t very good.

I don’t think you have to be Maddux to get Into the Hall. But I think that Mussina/morris/schilling level is a step below. Biggio Baines Raines a step below.

[ex-powderbroker]

brock, i get it and like the idea of a small hall too but mussina and morris are separated by about five floors with guys like cone and hallasay between them. schilling and mussina are much closer with schilling being better in the postseason and moose getting you there more often. like i’ve said already now that you have guys like him rice and jack morris in, the doors are open.

eta raines shouldn’t be in the same sentence as jim rice either.

fkna biggio stuck around for 20 years cause he was a player. you don’t get that opportunity if you can’t play. it’s why vizquel will get in too.

[Brock Landers]

Weird thing is...I think Rice is deserving. No bias!

Cone is between morris and Mussina though? I think Halladay is legit. Not a no brainer but he was the best or top 3 in each league for what- 10 years?

[ex-powderbroker]

halladay was legit and also closer to moose than morris.

what’s up with the lack of support for larry walker, that guy was way better than jim rice or harold baines.

[Danno]

Tom Glavine won 2 cy youngs, top 3 4 other times, led the league in wins like 7 times (wins are not reflective blah blah I know) and won a title. And 300 games. He combines the peak being excellent (Mussina doesn’t have this) with a long steady good career even if the end wasn’t very good.

I don’t think you have to be Maddux to get Into the Hall. But I think that Mussina/morris/schilling level is a step below. Biggio Baines Raines a step below.

Morris and Baines shouldn't be in the discussion. Most people acknowledge that they are WAY below the standard (and of course, neither was elected on the normal ballot).

As for Glavine vs Moose, career counting numbers favor Glavine, but like I pointed out, he had to throw 850 more innings -- 4 full seasons of 200+ innings -- just to get 35 wins. So I can't give him all that much credit for his 300 wins over Moose's 270. And yes, wins aren't the most useful stat, because if Moose was on those Braves teams and Glavine was on those Os teams, you can be damn sure Moose would have won a lot more and Glavine a lot less. And yes, he does have 2 CYAs, but as for a better peak? Stats don't show it. His 7 year peak is 44.2 WAR and his JAWS score is 62.5. Moose? 7 year peak of 44.5 and JAWS of 63.8.

I realize that WAR is not the most definitive stat, but you need some tool to compare players who played in different leagues (DH makes a difference!), in different parks, for different quality of teams. And when you look at stats like WAR and ERA+, Glavine doesn't grade out higher than Moose. They each have one massive season of 8+ WAR, and Glavine has one other over 6, 2 over 5, and 2 just barely under 5 (so if we count them as 5s, that's 6 total seasons of 5+ WAR), while Moose has a 7+ season and 2 6+ seasons, and 6 5+ seasons (so 10 total seasons of 5+ WAR, which is pretty incredible). They each have 2 seasons of ERA+ over 150, while Glavine has 3 more at 140+ and Moose has 2 more at 140+. Glavine has 5 more at 125+, while Moose has 7 more at 125+.

To make it clear so Irul doesn't lose his shit, Glavine was a clear Hall of Famer in my book, absolutely deserved induction. But outside of the magic 300 wins that he got by being a mediocre pitcher for 4 extra seasons, and 2 CYAs that he got because he was a great pitcher on a smoking good team before voters had advanced stats (ie wins mattered more), he isn't better than Mussina.

[ex-powderbroker]

i wonder if anyone will get 300 again, you’d need so much to go right. chris sale is about the most dominant pitcher on a great team, but like most of his contemporaries he sits around 100 wins at age 30.

[Danno]

i wonder if anyone will get 300 again, you’d need so much to go right. chris sale is about the most dominant pitcher on a great team, but like most of his contemporaries he sits around 100 wins at age 30.

Verlander has 204 and is 35, so he would have to be dominant into his 40s.
Kershaw has 153 and is 30.

Yeah, it will be a long while before we see a 300 game winner.

[Sirshredalot]

It's why so many want to play for the Yankees. Your odds of going to the post season and just national exposure day to day is so much better. Ichiro was hoping for a ring at the end, didn't quite make it.

Sure, the ESPN ballwashing is nice, but cashing Steinbrenner's fat checks while you're on the disabled list with your 3rd knee scope at age 37 doesn't hurt, either.

[AdironRider]

With the recent shifts in the game to more relief usage, I'll say it now you might not ever see it again.