I've got to argue Ryan if you're going to bang on Blyleven for his stats.One correction I'd offer is that Ryan won 20+ games twice, in 1973 and 1974.
Nolan Ryan:
-.526 winning percentage
-No Cy Young
-No 20-win season
-ERA+ 111
I'm not sure how old Anonymous is, but I can remember some of this discussion taking place after Ryan retired in 1993. Critics pointed to his losses and the fact that he didn't win a Cy and didn't have a significant post-season record (his one ring came as a minor contributor to the 1969 Mets) as reasons why Ryan shouldn't get in.
I come back to the adjusted ERA.
Adjusted ERA 300+ Wins (Post 1900 only)
Lefty Grove 148
Walter Johnson 147
Roger Clemens 143
Kid Nichols 140
Cy Young 138
Randy Johnson 136
Grover Cleveland Alexander 135
Christy Mathewson 135
Greg Maddux 132
Tom Seaver 127
Eddie Plank 122
Warren Spahn 118
Tom Glavine 118
Gaylord Perry 117
Steve Carlton 115
Phil Niekro 115
Nolan Ryan 111
Don Sutton 108
Early Wynn 107
Using adjusted ERA (again), Ryan is near the bottom of this list. The only pitchers below him are Sutton (whose credentials were consistently questioned while he was playing) and Wynn (who stuck around and around to get win #300.
The problem here is that these pitchers aren't really being judged on their accomplishments or how great they were. They're essentially enshrined once they get to 300 wins.
Of all the pitchers on this list, Sutton's the guy who looks like he doesn't belong (I don't remember Early Wynn). He pitched for a lot of strong Dodgers teams and won a lot of games as a result. He had a grand total of three years with an adjusted ERA of 130+ or higher. He never won a Cy Young. His postseason numbers are OK, but his World Series numbers (2-3, 5.26 ERA, 8 starts) are part of the reason that Sutton didn't ever earn a ring.
So I'd agree that you could make a case against Ryan being in the Hall. The problem is that 300 wins is the benchmark. Every pitcher with 300 wins or more is in, and arguing against those pitchers being in is tilting against a particularly tall windmill.
5 comments:
6 career no-hitters? led the league in strikeouts ELEVEN times? 5714 career strikeouts (#1 all time, btw)? I have no issue with his HOF resume.
I stand corrected on the 20-win seasons, but I appreciate that you accept that there are reasons not to put Ryan in the hall.
Do you think there should be a new metric used that would no longer turn 300 wins into an automatic "in" into the HoF? Say average wins per season? If some folks want to use wins as the ultimate arbiter, it would be interesting to see the average number of wins per season for all pitchers in the HoF. (hint, hint)
@Dr.: Look at the teams on which Ryan played. You could make an argument that, in a vast majority of his 27 season, Ryan wasn't even the best pitcher on his own team. (Mike Scott, Frank Tanana, etc.)
The idea is an interesting one, Anonymous, but I think the Hall of Fame will take care of that on its own. Let's take the Veterans Committee out of this for a minute, since it's done a nice job of mucking up the Hall in many ways.
3,000 hits is still a rare occurance...that is probably still a good benchmark. A .300 lifetime average or better over 10 years or more is not as rare as it once was. 400 home runs is certainly not as rare as it once was. I think those benchmarks will change during our generation.
On the pitching side, adjusted ERA is an en vogue measure, since it helps adjust over eras. Wins is certainly still going to be a factor, but 300 wins is going to be as automatic as ever in this age of pitching specialists; in fact, I think 250 wins will eventually be the "automatic" entry.
Frankly, if you look at the guys with 300 wins, Ryan stands out as, perhaps, one of the weaker cases (I don't believe this, by the way, but I see the argument). The other guys have quite a wow factor and I doubt you will make arguments against most of them...that is, until Tom Glavine is eligible.
So is Mussina > Glavine?
Love the discussion, BTW.
I think one thing we can all agree on is that Ryan should not have gotten such a high percentage of votes for the HoF (versus, say, Ted Williams, George Brett, etc.).
It's funny how hard it is to be objective in these discussions when it's your guy. Growing up, Ryan was always a favorite of mine.
Post a Comment