Doom, Apples versus oranges….. I compare Wagner to relievers; Halladay to starters. As far as evaluating relievers, I thought Wagner during the course of his career only Rivera was better. Just WAR alone indicates he was the equal of Hoffman with fewer innings Halladay? I’d go with Maddux, Schilling, Johnson, and Smoltz (off the top of my head) as either his superior or equal during the course of his career. Is Halladay a first ballot Hall of Famer? I guess we’ll find out. He would have been if he didn’t get hurt but, apparently, due to his insistence in completing… Read more »

Doom: “John Smoltz (whom you “smartly name”, and who IS a pretty interesting comp)” Are you implying I was stupid to name the other guys? It’s a Small Hall for me and how many of those guys surrounding Halladay were first ballot HoF’ers? It’s a vote – Cook County IL or Pascagoula MS – everybody gets one. I don’t believe there are 10 Hall of Famers in this exercise, either, and it’s not necessary to fill the entire ballot out. And, as things have gone in the past, 10 guys ain’t getting in this year either. If you want to… Read more »

Early returns indicate that Andruw may once again be battling to keep his head above the 5% threshold. (Or should it be foot?)

@Paul E 1. No, I wasn’t saying you were stupid. I mean, I don’t think it’s too hard to figure out that Roy Halladay was not Pedro. And I said Smoltz was a smart comp because he is: they had remarkably similar careers and awards balloting. It was just a particularly pertinent comp. Sorry for saying that, I guess. 2. As to the question, “how many of those guys surrounding Halladay were first ballot HoF’ers?” is easy to answer: the three guys directly below him: Glavine, Smoltz, and Ryan. 3. “It’s a vote . . . everybody gets one.” Agreed.… Read more »

One of the better games I witnessed. While I’m sitting in decent seats on the 1B line, Biggio goes yard off Wagner in the top of the 9th and Astros beat the Phillies 2-1 (it happens). I somewhat presciently remarked to a friend sitting next to me, “They’ll miss the playoffs by one game”. They did:

https://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/PHI/PHI200509060.shtml

Bob, I’ve been thinking about Doom’s math for several hours in my blundering way and it seems to me we should like at what level of starting pitching would compare to Wagner’s. Rounding slightly, Wagner “saved” 200 runs per 900 IP. Halladay through a bit more than 2700 IP. So, we should look at what ERA+ would a starting pitcher compiling 2700 IP need to have to equal Wagner’s 200 saved runs. Let’s assume a baseline league ERA of 4:00, or 1200 ER per 2700 IP. To save 200 Runs, that would mean an ERA+ of 120. Each 300 additional… Read more »

Bob, that’s a superb bit of analysis and advocacy.
I wonder if we could throw out to the group a very basic question that might have been implicit in my “ERA+120” question. There’s no doubt in my mind that, if i had been given the choice of Greg Maddux or Mariano, with perfect foresight, I would have taken Maddux. But what’s the value of an elite closer as compared to a quality starting pitcher? Is an elite closer worth an ace, a good #2, #3?

Doom, fantastic analysis through all of this, though as our in-house Tribe fan I have to make one factual correction – Lee was never behind Colon in the rotation because Lee and Colon were traded for each other. I’m pro-Wagner for the Hall, though I’m not sure he’d make my ballot because it’s so crowded. Of course I’m also pro-Halladay. Obviously there’s going to be a disconnect between starter and reliever value purely on an IP basis. Lee accumulated that 42.7 WAR in 2,150 or so innings, Wagner accumulated his 27.8 in 900 innings. Wagner absolutely excelled in his role… Read more »

Doom,
Re “apples/oranges”, is it safe to say if we directly compare Mariano Rivera (GOAT ?) to Halladay, Glavine, Blyleven, or even Don Sutton (as opposed to relief pitchers), no reliever would ever get in based on the “runs” analysis? That is to say, without differentiating these relievers from starters, they have, apparently, less value than #5 in the most rotations. And, doesn’t WAR differentiate them or ‘leverage/value’ the late innings as significantly more important to ‘winning’? You know, like Lenny Harris (PH) versus Edgar Martinez (DH) ?

Doom,
So of all the relievers (“in all the gin joints, in all the world”) , who, by this calculation is HoF worthy? Am I correct to think it would be merely Mariano, Wilhelm, and Wagner as shoo-ins? Because, honestly, I thought Sutter, Smith, and Gossage were pretty good relievers by the eye test. Hoffman was pretty effective as well. Is it possible that there is some sort of elevated K/9 bias in the sabermetric tea leaves?

1) Indeed, it may be different at the tails of the curve, but you get into sample-size issues there that make it all but impossible to derive the “right” number. For now, I’ll happily use 17% and assume it’s close enough, and figure the question of whether it’s helping or hurting HOF-quality arms is a 50-50 proposition. 2) That’s a fair-enough distinction, though I think we can all acknowledge that the reasons to neglect LI and the reasons to include it are both strong. I think, as with most things, it’s probably best to take both approaches into consideration. Honestly,… Read more »

DOOM: You state, in the above, “These numbers, by the way, present a case that Joe Nathan and Craig Kimbrel are (already, in the case of Kimbrel) above the standard for HOF relievers, if we’re to take Trevor Hoffman as the standard.” I thought we were comparing potential Hall of Fame relievers to starters – not Trevor Hoffman? Maybe I’m failing to see all these ‘conversions’ to “runs”, but the ‘conversions’ were made of a necessity to compare the relievers to starters, no? So, ultimately, since, with the exception of Rivera no one is really ‘great’ when compared to starters,… Read more »

Doom,
I think for Aaron you’re using his career RC divided by his AIR (877/.95=914) from baseball-reference. If not, it ‘works’ that way without the aggravation of OPS+ calculation…..
I’m OK with relievers in the Hall, regardless of their ‘inferiority’ to starters. It’s the steroid guys and the DH’s that I (me, that’s me typing) have an issue with. But, I understand by the logic of your calculations you do not believe many of them to be “hall worthy”.

Doom, You’ve got three good replies to my three responses to your three points. I’m only going to disagree with your conclusion on one, and it’s not much of a disagreement. Apples to Tomatoes: You’re right that there’s only a single HoF ballot and it includes position players, DHs, starters, and relievers. In filling out the ballot, you may have to decide whether to choose between a starter and a reliever, just as you may have to decide between a reliever and a position player. I don’t think the right way to handle either is to compare their stats to… Read more »

Bob: I’d further your remarks a little to include two other points: 1) Since, let’s say, Eckersley’s career transformation from failing starter to 9th-inning genius, the only relief pitchers who have gained a shot at Fame—as in HOF—are “closers,” because they have the big stat, SAVES, to validate their importance. The guys who used to be called “middle relievers,” but who are now used equally strategically with “closers,” get scant attention. A hold, somehow, especially since a fair amount of the holding is done to keep a team that is behind within range of pulling out a win, doesn’t carry… Read more »