Deacon Phillippe, no HOF?

[Archive]

Posted By: t206King

I have noticed that some pitchers with less wins, and higher ERAs then Deacon, and are in the Hall of Fame. Why is that?

http://www.baseball-reference.com/p/phillde01.shtml

[Archive]

Posted By: Jimi

I think this is a case of longevity. His first 7 - 8 years were nice, but wow, look at the end of his career. He simply didn't play too long. His complete games are nice, but so was everyone else's during that era.

Jimi

[Archive]

Posted By: john Freund

Sam Leever of that same Pittsburgh team had better numbers.

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

Hey Jonathan- welcome aboard. Was that your first post?

[Archive]

Posted By: John S

Deacon is one of my favorite deadball players. Outside of being a class act, he has one of the (if not the lowest) lowest walks per nine inning averages of all time. He also won the first ever World Series game. He was just a few victories shy of 200 when he retired. That might have made the difference if he had reached that milestone. Leever, as mentioned by John, also deserves consideration.

[Archive]

Posted By: john Freund

Hi Barry--glad to be aboard.

Was not my first post but I find the Philippe and the Pirates of the early 1900's quite interesting. I think that their pitching staff during the first decade of the century is perhaps the most underrated.

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

There is always been a lot of strong support for Phillippe from SABRites. He was basically the anchor of the great Pirates teams and certainly worthy of HOF consideration but highly unlikely that he'll get in given the current Vet Committee standards.

Jay

I've just reached Upper Lower Class. I am now officially a babe magnet for poor chicks.

[Archive]

Posted By: identify7

Less walks than games!

No other starter has done that (I don't think).