Most undervalued HOFers

[G1911]

The primary job of a pitcher is to give up as few runs as possible so that his team has the best job of winning. Ryan was 12% better than the league at this. League average is a real definable thing, unlike a fictional replacement pitcher that was completely made up. This is a poor effectiveness at the primary job of a pitcher in a HOF context. There are a few guys lower, mostly bad selections or big compilers like Sutton.

Of course, Ryan is a deserving HOFer because he pitched a ridiculous number of innings, 12% over league while hurling 5,400 innings adds up to a heck of a valuable career.

The Ryan mythos is based on selective memory of his highlight reel + emotion rather than anything to do with overall effectiveness. Striking out tons of people and then walking in runs doesn't really help a team anymore than a more conventional stat line that adds up to the same run performance. People can value whatever they want, highlight reel guys tend to be more popular than math guys. Math people know Perry and Ryan are pretty similar, and so if one values guys whose measurable overall performance can be had at much lower prices (like the OP question), guys like Gaylord are undervalued (except his 66, my favorite of his cards) and guys like Nolan are overvalued.

[Peter_Spaeth]

The longevity, and the fact that he maintained his blazing fastball and no hit capability well into his 40s, are certainly part of the Ryan mystique too -- and harder to measure. In fact, if memory serves, his hobby icon status really happened in his last few years, is that right?

[BillyCoxDodgers3B]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

The longevity, and the fact that he maintained his blazing fastball and no hit capability well into his 40s, are certainly part of the Ryan mystique too -- and harder to measure. In fact, if memory serves, his hobby icon status really happened in his last few years, is that right?

Where I grew up, I only heard Ryan's name mentioned one time when he was with Houston. I knew of him through the cards, but nobody seemed to talk about him. Once he moved to the Rangers, it felt like "All Nolan, all the time". This encompassed the game, the hobby and media attention to include appearances in commercials "For me, it's a couple'a Advil!". So from my personal experience, I would agree with what you say. People seemed mesmerized that this old man could still bring it.

[BillyCoxDodgers3B]

Originally Posted by G1911

highlight reel guys tend to be more popular than math guys.

Sports are designed to entertain the masses, first and foremost. There would be no money and no jobs otherwise. So yes, highlight reel guys are tremendous assets for everybody who makes their living in the industry. I'm not trying to be patronizing by stating the obvious.

I guess I'll just never fail to be perplexed and bothered by how down a lot of people are on Nolan Ryan on various internet forums. I don't feel it's deserved. There are so many different types of players who offer their brand of talent to the game. One's skill set may differ radically from another, yet each is an asset. As others have stated, I also condsier Ryan among the greatest pitchers, but for different reasons than different types of pitchers. He had his own way of doing things and it clearly worked out for him.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by BillyCoxDodgers3B

Sports are designed to entertain the masses, first and foremost. There would be no money and no jobs otherwise. So yes, highlight reel guys are tremendous assets for everybody who makes their living in the industry. I'm not trying to be patronizing by stating the obvious.

I guess I'll just never fail to be perplexed and bothered by how down a lot of people are on Nolan Ryan on various internet forums. I don't feel it's deserved. There are so many different types of players who offer their brand of talent to the game. One's skill set may differ radically from another, yet each is an asset. As others have stated, I also condsier Ryan among the greatest pitchers, but for different reasons than different types of pitchers. He had his own way of doing things and it clearly worked out for him.

And in turn, I will never fail to be perplexed by why people are bothered by other people using fair, reasonable math even if they don't want to deal with it themselves.

[Hankphenom]

I have my own bias as to the pitching GOAT, of course, but IMO there are about 15 pitchers in history for whom a reasonable case can be mounted, using different metrics, etc., and Ryan is not one of them. HOWEVER, I doubt if there's ever been anyone that batters enjoyed facing less. That, together with the freakish totals of K's and no-hitters should perhaps allow him to muscle his way onto the list.