OT - I need a few opinions from baseball fans

[Archive]

Posted By: dan mckee

Mike Mussina - Hall Of Fame or not? Have a small debate going on with pop, thanks Dan.

[Archive]

Posted By: Phil

I feel that the best way to determine a HOF is that if you have to think about it for more than 5 seconds or so, then the answer is NO.

Mike Mussina - NO

[Archive]

Posted By: Matt

There are a bunch of career pitchers who are contemporaries that will muddy the waters - Mussina's stats are pretty similar to say, Kevin Brown. Mussina has more post-season action by virtue of being on the Yankee$ but what he has done in the post-season with those opportunities is not impressive. I vote no.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jeff Lichtman

Dan, put the crack pipe down. He's 40 years old, never won 20 games, and is about 50 short of 300. Unless Mussina somehow wins 50 more games -- and even then -- I can't see it even remotely happening. He's barely hanging on to his spot in the rotation as it is.

[Archive]

Posted By: Matt

Jeff - You may have just suggested that Dan's dad is on the pipe...

[Archive]

Posted By: Jay Adair

From a Yankee fan - No. He'll fall short.

[Archive]

Posted By: john/z28jd

I think hes going to have a hard time unless he sticks around for 300 wins because hes missing two key things,a world series ring and at least one 20 win season. He only has one season title in the pitching triple crown stats,led the league in wins in 1995 i believe.He also has a losing record in the postseason but has played for some really good teams. He'd really have to hang around awhile for 300 wins because hes already pitching likes he's just hanging around.

I dont think hes done anything to separate himself from recent players like Tommy John,Jim Kaat,Bert Blyleven,Jack Morris who cant get in,Morris actually won 3 world series titles while Jim Kaat was just as good as Mussina but pitched for some bad teams and won 16 gold gloves which hasnt helped him one bit,so the 6 that Moose has won shouldnt even register.If Mussina doesnt get in its a travesty to the others

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

Who is this?

[Archive]

Posted By: Rawn Hill

Too few complete games and ERA too high.............NO.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jeff Lichtman

Good points about Morris, John and Blyleven. When those three go in Mussina can be considered next. At least those three were great pitchers of their generations. Mussina is not and has never been.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jim VB

I never thought of Mussina as a HOF pitcher, but his stats say he is a borderline candidate.

His career record is better than Bob Gibson. Gibson had better peak years, but Mussina has been consistent over a longer period of time. Gibson had 10 great years flanked by 3 poor years at the start and finish of his career. Mussina has been consistent throughout.

I think he's 39, not 40 and these days, he could muddle along for another 3-4 years winning 12-14 games a year.

I wouldn't vote for Mussina, but I can see him getting some support. Hell, after the sportswriters eliminate all the steroid guys, they have to vote for somebody.



Edited because I've forgotten how to spell simple words.

[Archive]

Posted By: Al Simeone

Dan,
As stated by many others there are other pitchers that are much better than Mussina and they arenot in so my vote would also be no at this point.

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

He's had a very good career, but not a great one. And as pointed out, there are many pitchers with equal or better stats that haven't been admitted.

Not a candidate.

[Archive]

Posted By: Phil Garry

Not well known enough for performing his best in big name situations and his regular season career numbers do not stand out enough for the HOF. One of the better starting pitchers of his ERA and fairly consistent but not quite HOF caliber.

[Archive]

Posted By: Bernie

Right now, no. However, if Mussina gets to 280 wins (needs 28) and 3000 strikeouts (needs 327) then he should get a lot of consideration. He's pitched the majority of his career in the steroid era and in a 5 man rotation. The only problem will be his era which will be around 3.75, but there are examples like Red Ruffin at 3.80, Ted Lyons at 3.67 and Herb Pennock at 3.60 and they all have less wins and considerably less strikeouts ...

[Archive]

Posted By: Darren

Mussina is a good ballplayer, not a HOF one IMHO.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jim VB

Off the top of my head I listed and researched 13 pitchers who I think had similar careers to Mussina. Five are in the HOF (Gibson, Sutton, Hubbell, Marichal and Catfish Hunter). Eight are not (Morris, Kaat, Blyleven, John, Brown, Schilling, Glavine, and David Wells). I think, of those most would only see Glavine as a "lock".

If you took all career records and "annualized" them to a 162 game season, NONE had an appreciably better average year than Mussina's 16-9.

Morris 16-11
Kaat 12-10
Blyleven 14-12
Gibson 16-11
Sutton 14-11
John 13-10
Brown 14-10
Schilling 14-9
Glavine 15-10
Hubbell 17-10
Marichal 17-10
C. Hunter 15-11
D. Wells 14-9

[Archive]

Posted By: Mark

At this point, I'd vote NO as well. A very good pitcher, but not quite HOF credentials, as eloquently pointed out in the posts above. Nothing accomplished in the post-season really hurts his cause.

What about Schilling? Really, the opposite scenario of a Mussina... Great post-season heroics, but not quite as good career stats (and will likely finish with less wins than Mussina). I think Schilling is the ultimate borderline guy. He may be better-liked, and therefore may stand a slightly better chance.

[Archive]

Posted By: Ed Hans

Have to agree with the majority here. At this point-no. Morris and Blyleven (and perhaps others) are more deserving. 3,000 strikeouts (if he gets there) would be hard to overlook, however. As to the criteria of 20 win seasons and ERA, we need to put Moose's career in it's proper context. Had he pitched in four man rotations in the 60s or teens, he would have had multiple 20 win seasons and his ERA would have been about a run lower. He also has the intangibles to make it in another capacity (broadcaster, manager, or executive).

[Archive]

Posted By: Jay

In my opinion--not even close

[Archive]

Posted By: James Feagin

When Mussina left Baltimore in 2001, us Orioles fans levied the "Curse of the Moose" on the entire Yankees franchise. It has worked like a charm thus far and will only be leave once Mussina retires. In all seriousness though, Mussina has very consistent (not outstanding) numbers, and as such, is a charter member of the "Hall of Very Good". A main reason why Mussina won't make the Hall of Fame is his aloof, seemingly arrogant and self-centered demeanor. A chalkboard has more personality than Mussina.

[Archive]

Posted By: Bernie

Schilling would need to AT LEAST get to 250 wins (34 more) and even then he's a longshot.

[Archive]

Posted By: H Murphy

I agree with Jay, not close in my mind either.

[Archive]

Posted By: Rob Scales

I don't think he's sponge-worthy either.

I do wish he would have gotten that one last strike on Carl Everett, though...

[Archive]

Posted By: Frank Wakefield

Before the Hall inducted Puckett and Carter and that woman, no way, impossible.

Now that Puckett, Carter and the woman are in, "Impossible? Things are happening every day." I don't think it could possibly happen, but who knows anymore?

[Archive]

Posted By: Anthony S.

Well, she might be a woman, but she is Manley.

[Archive]

Posted By: davidcycleback

My opinion is Mussina was often very good, but even at his height he wasn't one of the best. At his best he was still a poor man's Greg Maddux or Pedro Martinez. Barring gaudy career numbers, I wouldn't vote for him. Randy Johnson similarly hasn't won 300 games, but the difference is at his best he was as good as Maddux and Martinez at their best. There were a few years you could say Johnson was the best pitcher in the Majors. His five Cy Youngs including 2002 Pitching Triple Crown attest to this.

Also, Mussina's ERA was always too high. For example, in 1996 he won his best 19 games but his ERA was 4.81.

One great quality of Mussina as a pitcher is he ate up a ton of innings and over many consecutive years. I'd rather have a very good or an even above average pitcher pitching every start than Walter Johnson on IR. So Mussina gets an A for durability and innings pitched-- statistics that are important for successful teams and healthy pitching staffs. There's no question that Mussina's durability help contribute to many winning teams.

I guess that begs the sports question: Is a half a great season better or worse than a whole above average season? For example, in the NBA is the injury-interupted player who averages 27 points for a half season more or less valuable to the team than the player who averages 15 points without missing a game? Some coaches would prefer the player who plays every game.

[Archive]

Posted By: Lou

No,I don't think he'll get close.



Lou

[Archive]

Posted By: howard rosen

I think he may eventually get in although I'm on the fence about it. However, a couple things in his defense: 1) true, he never won 20 games. But if not for the shortened '94 and '95 seasons he probably would have done it twice. In '94 he might even have won 24 or 25 games. 2) it's true that he has a losing post-season record (7-8) but it is not because he pitched poorly. His 3.42 ERA is outstanding considering he was pitching against some of baseballs best teams. In fact, it is considerably lower than Andy Pettitte's post-season ERA (3.96) and here in NYC Pettitte is considered a great October pitcher. Pettitte pitched fairly well in the post-season but got a lot more offensive support from his teammates than Moose did. 3) Mussina's career ERA is .80 lower than his leagues ERA (3.71-4.51) which is a lot better than a lot of Hall of Famers.

[Archive]

Posted By: DD

I can't see how you can compare Mussina with Marichal, Gibson and Catfish Hunter. Maybe similar career stats, but these three had a 5-10 year period of dominance that Mussina's best year (probably 1995) can't hold up against.

[Archive]

Posted By: peter ullman

I say no to Mike Mussina...unless he becomes more like Jamie Moyer and pitches to see 320 wins. What about Andy Pettitte...only 204 wins but an impressive postseason and WS rings?

[Archive]

Posted By: Tom Russo

maybe my opinion is skewed by the fact that he has been so unreliable the past few seasons. It seems he either has good stuff or gets bombed in the first two innings. The bad starts have gotten more frequent. So, my first reaction is no way. However, over a hundred wins more than losses is pretty impressive. Many Hall of Famers aren't close to his winning percentage. He will be forty years old in December. I don't see him pitching more than another year or two, possibly getting to 275 wins. A very good career and he will get some votes but really another borderline guy like Kaat, Blyleven and Morris. I don't think he makes it.

[Archive]

Posted By: dan mckee

I am with Jay Miller, I don't think Mike was ever better than a #2 PITCHER And has no shot at the hall of fame. Sorry pop, you are arguing with your heart and not your baseball sense here.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jon Canfield

Dan - I think this is a very interesting question. Let's change it up a bit now - I don't think it's out of the question that Moose gets to 300 wins (I think he can stay around with some small market teams for another 3 years and at 10 wins a season, he could get there).

So, let's say Mussina gets to 300 wins - now is he a HOF'er?

Edited to add, I say yes - 300 wins makes him a HOF'er. While the 500 hr club may be diluted, the 300 win club is not. Would I say it is a lock, no - but I think it would be hard denying entry for a guy that obviously is durable enough to get to 300 wins.

[Archive]

Posted By: Bruce Babcock

Warren Spahn. HOF. 363 wins. 13 20-win seasons.

Mussina? I don't think so.

[Archive]

Posted By: brian

From another Yankee fan....no. This may be considered blasphemy, but I have never thought that Mattingly should go either. In both cases, good player, but not to the next level of great players. If you have to dig too deep for impressive stats, the answer is usually no.

[Archive]

Posted By: davidcycleback

Any pitcher today who gets 300 wins will get into the Hall of Fame, including Mussina. 300 wins has long been a ticket to the Hall, and it's harder to get 300 wins these days than in the olden days.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jeff Lichtman

Jon, I hope that the Hall never has to make that determination of whether to let Mussina in with 301 wins. The thought of him being in and Tommy John out really is sad.

[Archive]

Posted By: howard

I thought of this thread while watching Mussina dominate the Red Sox through six in a (so far) great 1-0 game. In dismissing his HOF chances several folks mentioned that he has never won twenty games in a season. If he continues to pitch well and somehow wins twenty this year do you guys think that would put him over the top for the Hall?

[Archive]

Posted By: brock

Yes he will be a Hall Of Famer.

[Archive]

Posted By: MVSNYC

Howard- No...winning 20 this year vs. 19 will NOT make the difference for him.

he's been a very solid pitcher over the years, but i wouldn't say he "dominated" in his era, as a HOFer should.


***edited to add, that i can MAYBE see him getting in years down the line voted-in by the veterans committee, but certainly NOT in his first few years of eligibility...

[Archive]

Posted By: Steve

No

Steve

[Archive]

Posted By: Anonymous

I've culled everyone who's "modern" (played most of their careers in the 80s and later) who have 190+ wins. Total of 18 players - I've listed the general consensus HOF chances of each (leaving aside the Clemens issue, which is seperate)

8Roger Clemens 354YES
9Greg Maddux (42)350YES
21Tom Glavine* (42)305YES
25Randy Johnson* (44)288YES
Mike Mussina (39)260????
Jack Morris 254????
49Dennis Martinez 245NO
David Wells* 239NO
Jamie Moyer* (45)237NO
Curt Schilling (41)216????
87Kevin Brown 211NO
Pedro Martinez (36)211YES
Andy Pettitte* (36)210????
John Smoltz (41)210YES
102Orel Hershiser 204NO
113Dennis Eckersley+ 197YES
David Cone 194NO
Dwight Gooden 194NO

Wins do appear to provide a very firm line of demarcation. Smoltz and Eck are seperate with their reliever roles. But really, besides Pedro with his unbelievable peaks and bonus points (Cy Youngs, .690 W%, etc.)...is there anyone else on the list that screams HOF? Don Sutton is a good comparison point to Moose...only one season over 20 wins, no Cys, a good but never great pitcher - but he has 60+ more wins.

Unless he can get to 300, or at least 290+, I don't see it...

[Archive]

Posted By: Steve Dawson

Mussina's HOF fate may be more interesting than alot of us think. In major league history, only one pitcher who finished his career with at least 100 more wins than losses, is not in the hall of fame. That is R.L. Caruthers, with a career record of 218-99.

At this point, Mussina is 260-150. If he finishes his career with at least 100 more wins than losses, does that count for anything?


Steve

Edited to add:

Mussina is currently 39. Looking at his stats, he could reach both 300 wins and 3,000 strikeouts in two more years. He's closer to the hall of fame than alot of us want to admit.

[Archive]

Posted By: MVSNYC

steve, i was going to mention the win percentage aspect...but even as a yankees fan, i just don't see him as a HOFer...

IF he makes it to 300, then i think we have a different conversation then, but as of now, not sure.

[Archive]

Posted By: jay wolt

Steve I agree! He's on the cusp of Cooperstown.
Moose is 261-150 (111+ differential) w/ 2726 K's
Some Hall Of Famer' don't have those #'s
Add his 6 Gold gloves and in a week & change his 6 All Star game.
He's worth consideration.

[Archive]

Posted By: scott brockelman

Knowing you and your father, DO NOT ARGUE with the man.

I hope that both of you will be coming to Chicago, IF not I will be lobbying for Baltimore for the next year.

Scott

[Archive]

Posted By: Patrick McHugh

Anon as i look at your list great work by the way i have to laugh and cry at the same time. Jack Morris i am a huge fan is by far and away the most deserving to go to the hof of any player alive today. Your list is living proof! On to mussina yes i do belive he will end up in the hof. I look at the players that are in and would put him as well as Jack above many.

[Archive]

Posted By: boxingcardman

It's better to burn out (Puckett, Koufax, Dean, Hack Wilson) than to fade away, at least if you want the HOF. I wouldn't vote for Mussina, but then I also would not have voted for Sutton. It all comes down to whether you reward longevity or peak performance. By setting a 10 season base, the HOF effectively has answered the longevity question; once you get to ten seasons, length of career is no longer a material factor. The key is the player's place in the pantheon of players. Mussina wasn't the best, ever. Most of his career he's not even been the best on his own team. Pedro may have fewer wins but he was the best.

If he does rack up some more stats, though, he may get in during a steroid era year because there may not be much else around...

Sic Gorgiamus Allos Subjectatos Nunc

[Archive]

Posted By: Chris East

I used to be a huge Mussina fan, but then I met him and, well, James Feagin's above "chalkboard" comment pretty much summed up my thoughts of him since (anyone want about 10,000 shiny Mussina cards from his Orioles days?).

If his career ended today, he has very little chance. If he reverts back to his 2007 performance and hangs on for one more comparable season, then he is still likely left out. But, if he can finish this season as strongly as his first half has been, and he strings together an additional 1-2 seasons comparable his '08 performance to date (a big if) to put him above 300 wins, then he definitely gets in.

In his defense, as has been pointed out above, he likely lost at least one 20-win season due to MLB work stoppage. Also, he was victimized by poor bullpen performance on many occasions in his career, particularly with the O's pen and/or poor run support in a number of games costing him a couple of 20-win seasons (and quite possibly a Cy Young award). There were a number of games where he got the loss or a no-decision after pitching 7-9 innings and giving up 0-2 runs. I know that every pitcher has that same problem, but it seems that Mussina caught that sort of bad luck (maybe karma) at the most inopportune times.

Another factor that could come into play with Mussina's HOF chances, regardless of how his final stats turn out, is the steroid debate. Maddox/Glavine are likely locks and don't appear at present to be tainted by the steroid issue. Clemens should also be a lock, but the steroid question has popped up in his situation. Depending on when he retires (and when guys like Pettite, Schilling, Pedro Martinez, etc retire) Mussina could be the first true borderline (stats-wise) pitcher eligible who pitched essentially his entire career during the steroid era. Right now the backlash is against hitters. If that continues, then he could receive a favorable nod. If, however, Clemens gets comparable treatment to McGwire/Sosa/et al, and a few more high-profile pitchers get outed for PEDs, then the voters' sentiments could turn against pitchers as well.