OT: MLB Discussion Thread: Part XXIV

[Paulie Walnutz]

Does said Boston writer also think Ortiz belongs?

Ortiz doesn’t belong because he’s a cheater, plain and simple. He took steroids but because he’s a lovable guy and not a douche like Arod everyone loved him. It’s a joke. He cheated, got caught, made up a stupid excuse, but because he’s “Big Pa-PED” everyone turns a blind eye.

 

[nyr2k2]

I've seen too many teams fail over the years due to inability to close out games to think it's not important. Rivera turned it into an eight inning game.

I understand the argument against closers. I get the logic. I just think it's silly.

 

[nyr2k2]

Ortiz doesn’t belong because he’s a cheater, plain and simple. He took steroids but because he’s a lovable guy and not a *****e like Arod everyone loved him. It’s a joke. He cheated, got caught, made up a stupid excuse, but because he’s “Big Pa-PED” everyone turns a blind eye.

I don't really care if guys juiced. Even if they're dicks.

 

[SA16]

I've seen too many teams fail over the years due to inability to close out games to think it's not important. Rivera turned it into an eight inning game.

I understand the argument against closers. I get the logic. I just think it's silly.

Here is a large part of my problem:

Here are the relievers with 300+ saves who also spent time as a starter and their stats as a starter (Excluding Eckersley because he is a completely different case than most of them being a 10 year starter and Goose Gossage because he randomly started for one year 5 years into his career)

Mariano Rivera - 10 starts. 5.94 ERA. 50 innings. 20 walks. 38 strikeouts
Joe Nathan - 29 starts. 4.60 ERA. 162.1 innings. 96 walks. 95 strikeouts
John Wetteland - 17 starts. 5.49 ERA. 82 innings. 31 walks. 74 strikeouts
Jose Mesa - 95 starts. 5.07 ERA. 564.2 innings. 232 walks. 285 strikeouts
Rick Aguilera - 89 starts. 4.08 ERA. 551 innings. 135 walks. 379 strikeouts.
Jason Isringhausen - 52 starts. 4.66 ERA. 319 innings. 142 walks. 217 strikeouts.

That's the whole list and they all range from bad to horrible. So I'm not saying closing isn't valuable (hey, I like that the Mets got Edwin Diaz) but I have a real problem with voting for guys like this for the hall of fame since when they pitched in a tougher role they more pretty much universally awful. Rather elect their manager to the hall of fame for deciding to move the player to the bullpen. If these guys could be terrible and still be in the 300+ save group how many other terrible starters could do something similar (not necessarily as dominant as Rivera though)

It's the same thing if you look at recent pitchers too. Here's the top 10 relievers in ERA the last 5 years 100+ innings

1. Zach Britton - a bust as a starter
2. Chad Green - pretty good starter in the minors. hasn't had much of a MLB opportunity
3. Richard Bleier - bad minor league starter
4. Andrew Miller - bust as a starter after being drafted 6th ovr
5. Wade Davis - bust as a starter
6. Chapman - surprisingly he never wanted to start so who knows
7. Carson Smith - reliever his whole career
8. Dellin Betances - a bust as a starter in the minors/moved to the pen
9. Kenley Jansen - reliever his whole career
10A. Craig Kimbrel- reliever his whole career
10B. Josh Hader - used as a multiinning reliever/could become a starter in the future if they want

 

[nyr2k2]

Yeah we had the same discussion last year because I remember you posting exactly the same stuff. I don't care how many guys could theoretically become 300+ save closers, I only care about those that did. Like those guys in your "recent" list--how many do you think could realistically go on to have a career as an elite closer lasting a decade or more? And the answer doesn't even matter because we'll likely never know with most of them.

At the end of the day guys are compared against other guys at their positions. Relief pitcher, and particularly important in this conversation, closer, is a position in baseball. Those guys get evaluated against their peers. As they should. They don't get evaluated against a bunch of shitty starters that maybe possibly could have become great closers because that's all hypothetical and can't be quantified. Like should we exclude from the Pro Football HOF all kickers, because they probably sucked too much to play real positions or because if the kids that played soccer instead wanted to kick footballs, they never would have had a job?

As long as relievers exist, they should have a place. I think the DH is stupid but as long as it is a recognized position, fine, let guys who served as a DH into the Hall if the numbers warrant it. Dominant closers, with the numbers to support their case, definitely belong.

EDIT: And @SA16 I don't mean to sound disrespectful. Like I said I understand your position and the logic behind it, and some other arguments against closers, and I think they're fair. I just don't subscribe to them.

 

[Machinehead]

A 3C is clearly the third best player on his team at a particular position, playing behind players who play the exact same position.

I don't know if I can buy starter and reliever being the same position.

To me, it's more like excluding defensemen from the Hall of Fame because they can't play forward.

 

[SA16]

A 3C is clearly the third best player on his team at a particular position, playing behind players who play the exact same position.

I don't know if I can buy starter and reliever being the same position.

To me, it's more like excluding defensemen from the Hall of Fame because they can't play forward.

I don’t think so though. Outside of like Burns and Byfuglien nobody has played both defense and forward in recent years. Tons of guys have gone from the rotation to the bullpen. Happens on a weekly basis.

But yea I do recall having the exact same conversation as the past.

The problem is no matter how good you are as a reliever if you are a comparable starter you’re way more valuable and it’s not logical for anyone who can start to want to pitch in the pen because there’s a huge salary difference.

 

[darko]

Ortiz doesn’t belong because he’s a cheater, plain and simple. He took steroids but because he’s a lovable guy and not a *****e like Arod everyone loved him. It’s a joke. He cheated, got caught, made up a stupid excuse, but because he’s “Big Pa-PED” everyone turns a blind eye.

Ortiz doesn't belong because he's a DH and his numbers aren't overly impressive. Edgar Martinez was a better hitter than Papi by a decent margin. Can't deny what Papi means to Boston, they can retire his number.

 

[Rangerfan4life90]

Ortiz doesn't belong because he's a DH and his numbers aren't overly impressive. Edgar Martinez was a better hitter than Papi by a decent margin. Can't deny what Papi means to Boston, they can retire his number.

Lol, what? I'm sorry, but even as a Yankees fan, Big Papi IS a Hall of Famer.

And his numbers and Edgar's are pretty much very comparable looking at their career stats. Edgar has him slightly beat in BA (.312 vs .286) and OBP (.418 vs .380), but Ortiz has like 230 more career home runs.

 

[darko]

Lol, what? I'm sorry, but even as a Yankees fan, Big Papi IS a Hall of Famer.

And his numbers and Edgar's are pretty much very comparable looking at their career stats. Edgar has him slightly beat in BA (.312 vs .286) and OBP (.418 vs .380), but Ortiz has like 230 more career home runs.

147-140 wRC+ advantage Edgar (ballpark adjusted).

Papi needs to have better counting stats since he has about 2000 more plate appearances.

 

[Rangerfan4life90]

147-140 wRC+ advantage Edgar (ballpark adjusted).

Papi needs to have better counting stats since he has about 2000 more plate appearances.

Not THAT drastic of a difference.

Either way, they are both hall of fame players.

 

[Roo Returns]

Ortiz is a darling. He played his most famous years for a pro-ESPN team. He's this lovable teddy bear. He was good with the media, the opposite of Jim Rice on Albert Belle (or even Jeff Kent) so regardless of whatever happened before, he will get the benefit of the doubt.

The one thing that really irks/upsets/even ticks me off (I'd use stronger language but I'm not trying to anger the mods) is this notion or folklore that the bloody sock game by Schilling was the best pitching performance of the modern era. Jack Morris Game 7 1991. Nothing in post WW II baseball even comes close.

Context is king and what Morris did as a 37 year old in a Game 7 of a WS against a high powered offense as a 37-year-old in an era before everyone went to Whole Foods did keto and ate quinoa, when many players were still spending winters smoking cigarettes, drinking beer, and fishing might be the most impressive individual accomplishment of any athlete ever. He pitched 10 shuutout innings. Let that set in.

I don't hate the Red Sox at all, and I have an argument that the Red Sox and us as Rangers fans have so much in common and how in a lot of ways it's practically the same team, but sometimes they get a little too much love from the mainstream Sportscenter media.

 

[Crease]

Any analysis of Big Papi's HOF prospects should factor in how much the media loves him. He'll get in.

On the PED issue, I'm starting to become of the opinion that I don't care. I believe players should be evaluated relative to their peers, and I get the sense that a substantial portion of the league used banned substances. Let the best of the era in but put their numbers in historical context.

 

[Filthy Dangles]

Ortiz has PED and DH hanging over his head. I doubt he gets in. Frank Thomas is the only regular DH in the Hall.

 

[I Eat Crow]

Ortiz will get in, but he won't be first ballot. If Ortiz gets in, Edgar Martinez should too.

Don't even get me started on Mariano Rivera. He's the GOAT in his position. Automatic first ballot in my book.

 

[nyr2k2]

Ortiz has PED and DH hanging over his head. I doubt he gets in. Frank Thomas is the only regular DH in the Hall.

Yeah and The Big Hurt had a much better wRC+ and WAR. He was just a better player.

Still, for me, as I said, I don't care about PEDs or the DH stuff. I look at him and see the HR, the OPS, that he was one of the most feared hitters of his generation right up until he retired, and he's a pretty easy in for me. Doesn't mean he will get in, but I suspect it will happen. Also, I have no numbers to support this, but it just felt like during his career he was one of those guys who you absolutely, positively did not want to see coming to the plate in a big spot late in a game.

 

[Roo Returns]

I think Harold Baines did enough to get in the HOF. Maybe it's because I saw him play several times and do damage in person, but the guy was a monster hitter. He did play forever.

As for the writers hating on Mariano Rivera. They're just being hipsters and doing it to start controversy.

 

[nyr2k2]

The problem for me with the Rivera discussion is that you've already put in guys like Hoffman and Eckersley. And other guys who were primarily known as relievers like Fingers. The cat is out of the bag with relievers. You can't put in Hoffman and then not put in the guy who did what Hoffman did but better. Or, it would be stupid not to.

The DH thing is also weird to me. Like we've got Nellie Fox, Bill Mazeroski, Luis Aparicio, Ozzie Smith, some dude named Rabbit Maranville, and a bunch of other guys in the HOF based primarily on their defense. Some of those guys were terrible offensively. Vizquel may make it before all is said and done. So why can we put in guys who excelled primarily at defense but were nothings offensively, but not vote for guys who were primarily DHs on the strengths of their offensive accomplishments? I get that the defense-first guys still had to hit, whereas DHs don't, but still--we're evaluating based on specific accomplishments.