I was trying to look for an original post to do so I wouldn't have to talk about this because let's be honest, the subject has been beaten to death. But just for fun I'll talk about Jack Morris' Hall of Fame chances.
Pros: 254 wins, won Game 7 of the 1991 World Series (arguably one of the best games of all-time), "ace" of 3 World Series Champions, 5 All-Star Appearances, led the league in wins twice, led the league in innings once, led the league once in strikeouts, once in complete games, once in shutouts. Had a fantastic moustache.
Cons: 105 ERA+ (just barely above average), not in the top 100 for 100 best pitchers in the New Bill James Historical Abstract, not in my top 100 either, 3.90 career ERA, one all-star season according to rWAR, 1 according to fWAR. No all-star seasons if averaged WAR. Never led the league in ERA, WHIP, ERA+. Led the league once in walks, multiple times in wild pitches (6 to be exact), never won a Cy Young Award, never led the league in WAR for pitchers.
Additional Notes: The argument for Jack Morris usually includes the phrase, "pitching to the score". As I understand it, this means that a pitcher is likely to let up when his team is ahead so he can save his best stuff for a game where he needs it. This is used to explain his high ERA. Is this a possibility? Certainly. Jon Heyman from Sports Illustrated said, "he pitched to the score like the great ones do." However, the great ones that one would look at have much much better ERA and ERA+ than Jack Morris so it seems like the great ones either did not "pitch to the score" or simply was better at it than Jack Morris, either way it does not bode well for Morris. Also, wouldn't pitching to the score be counter-productive? If you were winning a game 5-0 and you proceeded to give up a few runs because you were saving your best stuff, so the score is now 6-3. I am not a genius nor have I studied it but it would seem rather obvious that a team has a better likelihood of winning 5-0 instead of when the score is at 6-3. Further, if a pitcher was to give up a few runs then he would likely be taken out of the game and a lesser pitcher would have to come in with a closer score then before. Pitching to the score seems like a "bullshit dump" like Bill James likes to say.
Jack Morris was labeled a big game pitcher in large part because he won Game 7 of the 1991 World Series. I don't know if that is quite true but we'll take a look.
I'll give you three pitchers and you tell me which pitcher you would rather have.
Pitcher A: 5-1, 2.47 ERA, 6 GS, 47.1 IP, 1.077 WHIP, 8.2 H/9, 1.0 HR/9, 1.5 BB/9, 6.8 K/9.
Pitcher B: 7-4, 3.80 ERA, 13 GS, 92.1 IP, 1.245 WHIP, 8.1 H/9, 0.9 HR/9, 3.1 BB/9, 6.2 K/9.
Pitcher C: 5-5, 4.19 ERA, 13 GS, 81.2 IP, 1.310 WHIP, 8.4 H/9, 0.9 HR/9, 3.4 BB/9, 7.8 K/9.
Pitcher A is Bert Blyleven.
Pitcher B is Jack Morris.
Pitcher C is Kevin Brown.
Brown's ERA is influenced by his last post-season start, moreso than Morris'. But back to Morris being a big-time pitcher, he was a great pitcher in the post-season half the time (1984 and 1991). The other half he was terrible (1987 and 1992). 1992 he was considered by his supporters to be the ace of the World Series Champion Toronto Blue Jays. He went 0-1 6.57 ERA in the ALCS and 0-2 8.44 ERA in the World Series. Morris lost 3 games for the Blue Jays in the 1992 post-season. They lost 4 games in the post-season. If you are considering Morris the ace of the team that year, you are a fool. He wasn't a big game pitcher that year. In 1987, he pitched Game 2 of the 1987 ALCS, he lost to Bert Blyleven. Blyleven came back to pitch game 5, Morris did not. The Twins won in 5 games. It just doesn't seem like he was a big-game pitcher.
Finally, Heyman likes to point out that Blyleven wasn't considered the pitcher of his time, it was a revisionist history that has put him into the Hall of Fame. He points this out by saying Blyleven's MVP share was ranked 936th, highest finish 13th and his Cy Young career share is ranked 104th, highest finish 3rd. He says he was never even considered a top 2 pitcher in the league.
Well, Morris never finished higher than 3rd in the Cy Young vote either. Morris, too, was never considered a top 2 pitcher in his league. His highest finish was 3rd in both 1981 and 1983. Blyleven finished in the top 3, two times as well. Morris must have finished better in the MVP voting then because otherwise the argument makes no sense. Morris finished 13th twice in both 1991 and 1992. Blyleven finished 13th once.
The argument doesn't hold water to me.
Every argument to put Morris in the Hall of Fame is just not good enough. He was a fantastic player better at baseball then I will ever be at anything I do. But to say that he is worthy of the Hall of Fame is wrong. Sorry Jack, I never got to see you play but thank you for the 1991 World Series Championship. You were a great player but you were just below making it to the Hall of Fame.
Sorry.
But you had an awesome moustache.
No comments:
Post a Comment