[Tabe]

Originally Posted by Robextend

I'm really torn when it comes to closer's. Can they be considered failed starters...maybe, but they are an accepted part of the game these days and there probably should be a place for them in the HOF. With that said, I would think you need to be a completely dominant one to get in, and I am not sure there are any in that I would consider dominant.

Even Eckersley, who is regarded as a top closer of all-time...take a look at his 11 year stretch as closer as far as ERA:

1987 - 3.03
1988 - 2.35
1989 - 1.56
1990 - 0.61
1991 - 2.96
1992 - 1.91
1993 - 4.16
1994 - 4.26
1995 - 4.83
1996 - 3.30
1997 - 3.91

His dominance fizzled after 5 years or so...his starting numbers were good, but certainly not HOF worthy as maybe a Smoltz would be considered.

So why is Eckersley in the HOF?

I've been asking that for awhile now. I didn't think he belonged when he got elected.