Quote:
Originally Posted by nat
Faber played six more seasons after that. In which he won 49 more games, put up 15 more WAR, and pitched to a 111 ERA+. That's six more years of good pitching. (Not great pitching, but plenty good.) Cicotte may have had that in him - he was still a fine pitcher in 1920 - and if he could keep pitching effectively into his early 40s like Faber did, he would be well-qualified for the fall of fame (except for that whole throwing the world series thing). As it is, he's not a bad candidate, just not an especially good one either.
|
Yes, I only compared their first 14 season since Cicotte's career ended after his 14th...and through that point they are pretty comparable with Cicotte being the better of the two. Cicotte's durability was beginning to be an issue but he was a knuckleball pitcher who was putting together solid seasons when he was banned...so possibly could have extended the career with a year or two more of 20+ wins with that crazy Sox team and rotation...50 wins in the next 3 season would not have been unreasonable for Cicotte...but would never know obviously bc of his choices
Also I dont think he will get elected and shouldnt be elected bc he did throw at least 1 WS game (game 1) and very likely threw games in the 1920 season...his guilt is not debatable unlike Jackson's