Hey, I've got a great joke: Did you hear the one about Carlton Fisk not being elected to the Hall of Fame? It goes like this: Carlton Fisk wasn't elected to the Hall of Fame. (That's the joke.)
If Fisk doesn't deserve the Hall in some voters' minds, then please tell me how in the world this same group of voters elected Don Sutton last year? I want to meet the writers who voted for Sutton and against Fisk. And please don't give me this crap about the "honor" of a first-ballot selection, or the depth of competition leaving Fisk the odd man out. These jerks who vote against a guy one year and then for him the next are sanctimonious cretins who should be stripped of their right to elect Hall of Fame members.
I don't need to go into Fisk's qualifications, especially for most of my regular audience. If he doesn't belong in the Hall, then does any catcher? Does anyone other than a 3,000 hit, .300+ hitter qualify, irrespective of position? Does leadership and integrity and defensive superiority and yes, longevity, count for anything? Well, rather than vent on that issue endlessly, this instead gives me an opportunity to delve a little into that last issue, longevity, in the context of last year's selection of Sutton, as well as the case of Fisk.
The recurring issue is simply whether a player who merely lasts a long time, and thereby puts up elite level career statistics in key categories, should be more qualified for the Hall of Fame than a shorter lived star, whose "peak" value may have exceeded the long-lasting player's but who faded more quickly. Jim Rice and Luis Tiant are not in Cooperstown (note the Red Sox bias), even though each had periods of exceptional greatness, because they fell short of the type of threshold career numbers (500 HR, 300 Wins) that make for automatic selection. To an extent, that may be okay: Roger Maris isn't in, either, even though his 2 peak years were among the greatest ever, but his stardom was truly momentary. I could perhaps accept the Rice and Tiant snubs if the voters also turned down the Don Suttons as well. But there appears to be an unsupportable bias in favor of longevity over peak greatness.
Here's my argument on Sutton: Would you, or any of the voters, consider him Hall material if his career numbers were 192-120, with an ERA about 2.95? Those are pretty good numbers, but not Hall of Fame credentials, especially given that he pitched in the NL, and was never one of the elite of his era (Gibson, Seaver, Carlton, even Valenzuela). Well, those results represent the peak of Sutton's career, from 1971 to 1982. The rest, before '71 and after '82, he went 132-136, with an ERA close to 3.70. If he wouldn't have qualified for the Hall of Fame on the basis of his best years, why would pitching 11 additonal years of pure mediocrity make him more qualified? Just reaching that arbitrary 300 win level based upon a durable arm doesn't make him an All-Time Great.
Compare Sutton with Tiant, and the results are very interesting. Their peak careers overlapped from 1966-1980 (I'm not counting '81-'82 when Tiant was just hanging on). During that period, Tiant had better seasons at least 8 years, Sutton was better 4 times, and they were pretty even 3 years (you can argue some of these, like 1973, when Tiant was 20-13, 3.34, and Sutton was 18-10, 2.43). For his whole career, Tiant's record was 229-172, 3.30, with 2,416 Ks. From 1966-1980, Sutton was 230-175, 2.95 (in the non-DH NL), with 2,930 Ks. Very similar, indeed. After Tiant retired, Sutton was 13 wins over .500, 94-81, about 3.60. Again, the post-Tiant performance is way below Hall standards.
So, if you want to put Tiant in, and accept the relative brevity of his peak greatness, plus the decent level of career stats, then I can accept Sutton, too, as kind of Tiant's inverse. But how can you keep out guys who were clearly "famous" for some portion of their careers, while electing a guy who was, at his best, about as big a deal as maybe a Chuck Finley or a Scott Erickson is these days? Here's another contemporary example: Randy Johnson. With less than 200 wins and only 2,400 Ks, at age 35 he doesn't stand much chance of making the Hall of Fame. But for the past few years, he's been one of the 2-3 best pitchers in baseball, on a par with the all-time greats. Randy Johnson is far better right now than Don Sutton ever was, but Sutton makes Cooperstown, while the Tiants and Johnsons stay home.
Anyway, that whole rant brings me back to Fisk. By the Sutton standard, Fisk is absolutely, positively a Hall of Famer, first ballot. He played more games, hit more homers than any other catcher, while also being a leader, an All Star, a winner. He didn't win any MVPs or home run titles or batting crowns, so maybe he's not quite a Tiant or a Johnson in peak value. But that's not the standard that they apply to Hall of Fame candidates, obviously. In this case, the voters simply displayed idiotic hypocrisy, solely because there were "too many" other qualified candidates, and it's just stupid. I wonder what will happen in a few years if, say, Cal Ripken, Rickey Henderson, Wade Boggs, and Tony Gwynn all retire at the same time? Will they snub Boggs in the same way?
Candidate update. Okay, enough. Let's move on to the candidates. I'm early (or actually, on time) this year, since I last checked in in June of '98. But what the heck, it's always fun to delve into this topic. The latest List, with a few annotations, includes:
Shoo-ins. Cal Ripken, Rickey Henderson, Wade Boggs, Barry Bonds, Tony Gwynn, Roger Clemens, Greg Maddux, Mark McGwire. With great foresight, I added McGwire last year, so this group is unchanged. The amazing thing is that most of this group, already immortal, still added to their credentials impressively last year: Clemens's 5th Cy Young, another stolen base title for Henderson, strong years by Gwynn, Maddux, Bonds.
Sure Things. Ken Griffey, Jr., Frank Thomas, Juan Gonzalez. Juan Gone moves to this level with his 2nd MVP. These are shoo-ins in waiting, just trying to get to that 10-year qualifying plateau. Look for Alex Rodriguez to be promoted here in about 2-3 more years.
The Strong and Mighty. Ivan Rodriguez, Mike Piazza, Mo Vaughn, Jeff Bagwell, Vinny Castilla, Albert Belle, Sammy Sosa, Larry Walker, Tom Glavine, John Smoltz. As awesome as this group looks today, experience tells us that only a handful at most will keep it up enough to make the Hall. Helping themselves the most this year were Glavine, who looks like a real strong candidate now, and of course Sosa, who nevertheless will have to maintain a superstar status a few years to avoid being a Maris clone. Then there's Castilla. Is he the first hitter since Jim Rice to hit .300 with over 200 hits, 45 homers, and 140 RBIs? (Oh, wait, Belle did it, too.) So why does he seem so unheralded? Vaughn is still somewhat of a longshot; he'll have to lead the Angels to a World Series, I think.
Appearing (or reappearing) on the Radar Screen. Carlos Delgado, Jim Thome, John Olerud, Craig Biggio, Nomar Garciaparra, Derek Jeter, Alex Rodriguez, Chipper Jones, Jose Canseco, Manny Ramirez, Bernie Williams, Pedro Martinez, and a bunch of closers (Troy Percival, John Wetteland, Mariano Rivera, Rod Beck, Trevor Hoffman). Who knows what will happen with relief pitchers? Assuming Eckersley goes in five years from now, and Lee Smith, too, the barrier may be opened somewhat. But the standards still haven't been set, so there's no way to predict how good they'll have to be, for how long, to qualify. Most of the others here have begun great careers, with Canseco and Olerud possibly returning to Hall candidacy in '98. The Three Shortstops would appear to be the best of the group.
Dropping Out of Sight. Roberto Alomar, Chuck Knoblauch, Matt Williams, Andy Pettitte. Just to show how fragile is superstardom, it used to be the Three Second Basemen who were infallible (these two plus Baerga). After last year, none of them seems a bonafide Hall of Fame candidate any more.
Borderline. Raphael Palmeiro, Barry Larkin, Edgar Martinez, John Franco. I doubt any of them will make it, but they'll get votes.
No Cigar. Tino Martinez, Fred McGriff, Andres Gallaraga, Harold Baines, Darryl Strawberry, Moises Alou, Dante Bichette, Gary Sheffield, Greg Vaughn, David Cone, Randy Johnson. Great players, one and all, but they'll have to be content with earning $40-million or so. They can always buy a plaque.
Entering the Waiting Room. Paul Molitor, Dennis Eckersley. Joe Carter and Dennis Martinez will stay on the ballot for several years, but aren’t likely to rise to the top.
Responses? Feeble arguments in opposition? E-mail me, and maybe I’ll respond!
Comments? Questions? Silly reprobation?
Contact me:
Back to Baseball Journal front page
Rotisserie/Fantasy Baseball
The Good IV League
(c) 1999 David N. Townsend