I would agree, if his "hobby status" were anywhere on par with pitchers of his overall caliber like Sutton and Blyleven, whose numbers are very similar in WL PCT, ERA, durability, and even shutouts - (Nolan 61, Bert 60, Don 58) -
I wouldn't even kick if it was on par with guys from that era who were clearly greater overall than he was, like Gibson, Seaver, and Carlton.
But the point is that the value of his cards is nowhere near those other guys - it far outdistances them.
So, it is what it is - we're in a wacky hobby, and that's part of why it's fun. But don't expect me to agree that it's deserved in the face of the numbers.
PS: Don't you think it means something that of all the starting pitchers in the HOF (who are in because of pitching as opposed to other contributions), Ryan would have the absolute worst winning percentage (.526) if not for good old Eppa Rixey (.515)?
Quote:
Originally Posted by packs
Feller won 4 more games for 1946 Indians than Ryan did for the 74 Angels. I wouldn't say somehow because he won four more games. I think you're making a mountain out of a mole hill.
Ryan averaged 232 innings a year over 27 seasons and threw in the upper 90s to 100 the entire time. He was a freak. His hobby status is deserved.
|