Thread: Hal Newhouser
View Single Post
  #13  
Old 08-13-2018, 06:39 PM
rats60's Avatar
rats60 rats60 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 2,900
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth View Post
Ted yeah I think he got in under the Dizzy Dean/Sandy Koufax exception that where you only have 5 or so great years but they are REALLY great years, they'll overlook insufficient career numbers. It's strange how he suddenly became great and just as suddenly went back to being average.
I don't think that is fair. Newhouser pitched for 17 years (14 if you don't count 3 where he barely pitched). He won 207 games, had a 3.06 ERA and a 130 ERA+. Those are pretty solid numbers. He won 2 MVPs and finished 2nd. He was an All Star 6 years in a row (would have been 7 if there was a 1945 game).

63.3 WAR 52.8 WAR 7 58.0 JAWS. That is just ahead of Juan Marichal, Roy Halladay, Clayton Kershaw (Is he a HOFer if he retired at the end of this year?), Don Drysdale, Jim Bunning, John Smoltz, Don Sutton, Early Wynn and Whitey Ford. These are the non Hofers with a higher JAWS: Roger Clemens (steroids), Curt Schilling (most think he will get in), Mike Mussina (most think he will get in) and 3 19th century guys who only pitched 10 or 11 years (Jim McCormick, Tommy Bond and Charlie Buffington). He's tied with Wes Ferrell who many think should have been in but the Veteran's Committee may have confused him with his brother. Koufax and Dean had their careers cut short by injury, Newhouser didn't. You would want to have a pretty small Hall of Fame if you think his career numbers are insufficient.
Reply With Quote