Quote:
Originally Posted by the 'stache
Those numbers are a nice guideline, but they're not definitive. Nor, are they meant to be. Example:
Hall Of Fame StatisticsPlayer rank in (·)
Black Ink Pitching - 78 (12), Average HOFer ≈ 40
Gray Ink Pitching - 151 (94), Average HOFer ≈ 185
Hall of Fame Monitor Pitching - 227 (17), Likely HOFer ≈ 100
Hall of Fame Standards Pitching - 46 (48), Average HOFer ≈ 50
According to two of these four standards, maybe the greatest pitcher to ever play the game is a below average Hall of Famer.
Who is this? Sandy Koufax, who, like Hafey, had an abbreviated career. Now, Haffey never dominated the league the way Koufax did, granted. But certain players who do not have the eye-popping career numbers can merit inclusion in the Hall of Fame.
|
First, Koufax rates very high in two of four categories, Black Ink and Hall of Fame monitor. And even on the two he doesn't rate so high he is way ahead of Hafey, who is just miserable in all four. Second,as you say, Koufax's peak years were SO exceptional that he deserves a little leeway;We can't say the same for Hafey. Third, I am not familiar with anyone saying Koufax is the best pitcher of all time. I think Bill James rates him in the bottom of his top 10 and that seems right to me. Finally, stats of course do not tell all, but the Baseball Reference stats are adjusted for era and are in my estimation pretty reliable.