Mariano and the Hall

[arch stanton]

It's cool to call him the greatest closer of all time but remember that the modern one inning closer was just invented in 1988

Edited December 24, 2018 by arch stanton

[Pancake Bear]

1 hour ago, arch stanton said:

It's cool to call him the greatest closer of all time but remember that the modern one inning closer was just invented in 1988

Yeah - on that point:

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/goose-egg-new-save-stat-relief-pitchers/

[mulwin444]

3 hours ago, Sean-Regan said:

 

So, to you two, a simple question: If Rivera is first ballot, should Mussina and Edgar be first ballot? 

Let me clarify...I honestly don't care if it's 1st ballot, 5th ballot, 10th ballot, if you belong in the Hall of Fame you should be in.  

In that context, to me, Mussina and Edgar are Hall of Famers...if they would have got in on the first ballot I would have been fine with it, just like it looks like Mariano will.

[Blarg]

5 hours ago, Sean-Regan said:

 

So, to you two, a simple question: If Rivera is first ballot, should Mussina and Edgar be first ballot? 

That is two separate arguments. I think Rivera is a 1st ballot for the job he accomplished over such a long period of time. 

Neither Edgar or Mussina established the same level of complete dominance over their careers. Sure, they have a ticket that should probably be punched but they were not the best that was during their careers. 

Mussina for instance never once lead the league in any significant catagorey through his entire 18 year career. The best you could say is for a long stretch he pitched a lot of innings. He was very consistent but not exactly dominating for stretches at a time. He was not Pedro Martinez, the guy he was second to in Cy Young voting in his best season. 

During Rivera's career there was almost no relief pitcher that came close to his near perfection. That is the difference. One separated himself from his peers by a huge margain, the other was an also ran every season. 

[Pancake Bear]

20 minutes ago, Blarg said:

That is two separate arguments. I think Rivera is a 1st ballot for the job he accomplished over such a long period of time. 

Neither Edgar or Mussina established the same level of complete dominance over their careers. Sure, they have a ticket that should probably be punched but they were not the best that was during their careers. 

Mussina for instance never once lead the league in any significant catagorey through his entire 18 year career. The best you could say is for a long stretch he pitched a lot of innings. He was very consistent but not exactly dominating for stretches at a time. He was not Pedro Martinez, the guy he was second to in Cy Young voting in his best season. 

During Rivera's career there was almost no relief pitcher that came close to his near perfection. That is the difference. One separated himself from his peers by a huge margain, the other was an also ran every season. 

Ignores the fact that Mussina’s value dwarfs Rivera’s by contrast. Mussina is a clear Hall of Famer, Rivera is a borderlinen guy. Yet there’s enough voters who are stuck in the dark ages and can’t see that. Relievers - even fantastically successful and talented ones like Rivera - simply aren’t as valuable as fans think. 

[Tank]

11 hours ago, Inside Pitch said:

He opens up by admitting Rivera is the greatest closer of all time -- point blank..  then....

Even so, I am not voting for him for the Hall of Fame, and three people come to mind as part of the reason why — Craig Kimbrel, Adam Viniateri and Taylor Dakers....

The dude then goes on to point out how it felt when Kimbrel pitched.   Because you know -- the performance of others, including people in other sports should be taken into consideration when talking about ONE specific individual.   Beyond that -- this guy also closed with this...

Thus, I’m not voting this year. A submitted blank ballot is “no” vote for every candidate, so I’m doing a Switzerland and not sending one at all.

I mean it's great that he's justifying his BS by saying he doesn't want to deny the dude the chance to be the first guy to be unanimously elected but -- his publicly taking the position he has screams I want to be the douchebag that didn't vote for him but also didn't keep him out.  Sorry but this screams "look at me!!!!" more than anything else.  If someone believes something as strongly as this twat is trying to imply then he should be willing to take on whatever criticism might come his way.  Not a fan of writers trying to make themselves the story and this sort of feels that way.

FTR -- I have no problem with people voting how they believe, and I'm a big believer in closers being overrated and a champion of closers being more mythology than anything else.  But the HOF is supposed to be about the best players that ever played at their respective positions and Mariano was far and away the greatest closer of all time.    And yeah -- I checked this guy has left Edgar off his ballot every year but he had said this about David Ortiz/Edgar  

"I get more mail about Martinez than any other candidate, and he was a great player, no doubt. And yes, it’s not fair that David Ortiz got into so many more postseason games than did Martinez, and thus became larger than life. But that’s the Hall of Fame — larger than life, full of players who can fill a stadium just because they are in the lineup."

Hold fast to that last bit about being larger than life -- this was his reasoning last year when he voted for Vladi

Guerrero? Fits my description of a Hall of Famer. A great player whose appeal went beyond statistics. Every one of his plate appearances was a baseball mini-series. You couldn’t wait to see what might happen on the next pitch.

I'm sorry -- but if thats his definition of a HOFer -- how does Mariano not fit that description?   Is there anyone on this board that didn't feel a rush on the rare occasions when the Angels did get to Rivera?

When it's all said and done -- I don't care if he votes for a guy or not -- it's his ballot, but this sort of shit pisses me off.  Sort of like when an umpire tries to make himself the story...

total doosh move on his part. he makes an interesting side story on whether some people need to relinquish their vote.

[Blarg]

1 minute ago, Sean-Regan said:

Ignores the fact that Mussina’s value dwarfs Rivera’s by contrast. Mussina is a clear Hall of Famer, Rivera is a borderlinen guy. Yet there’s enough voters who are stuck in the dark ages and can’t see that. Relievers - even fantastically successful and talented ones like Rivera - simply aren’t as valuable as fans think. 

So is a power hitting first baseman more important than defensive wizard shortstop? They are two completely different jobs with completely different roles. Dunn blasted way more home runs than Smith, racking up five seasons in a row hitting 40 dingers. Smith hit 28 in his entire career. 

You've lost focus. Rivera is the best at his craft like Ozzie Smith was as a shortstop. Mussina was really damn good at his job but not the best of his craft. Not exactly an Adam Dunn comp but the idea is the two had different roles while both were designated as playing similar positions, two infielders and two pitchers.

Of the two you are arguing the best player at his position isn't as valuable as a second tier player at another position simply by counting more innings as the deciding factor, not the overall skill set and accomplishment at their given role. 

[Blarg]

Let's get back to infuencing a games outcome. At the most Mussina pitched 33 games a season. His impact was limited to those outings, regardless of innings pitched.

Rivera averaged about 60 games per season. Almost twice as many instances where his skills were influencing the games outcome. Most of those innings we're the last which really is the games deciding factor since there is no time clock, only outs recorded. 

 

[Docwaukee]

Rivera's WPA - 55.09.  3rd overall since the stat could be recorded with data back to 1974.  

Clemens, Maddux, Rivera, Randy Johnson, Pedro Martinez, Kershaw, Halladay, Mussina, Smoltz, Schilling are the top 10.  

WPA takes leverage into account.  Leverage is highly discounted in WAR.  

While the save stat is flawed, pitching at the end of games when you're the last guy out and any sort of failure means a loss or potential loss for your team  matters and personally, I don't think WAR does a good job of taking that into account.  

[notherhalo]

The way things are going, the idea of a "closer" might be obsolete, and future HOF relievers who have way more "high leverage" outs could be seen as far more worthy than someone who has likely earned 2/3rds of their outs away from the MOTO.

[Rico]

13 hours ago, Sean-Regan said:

 

 Rivera was incapable of being a good starter which is why he was in the bullpen.

 

He had 10 starts as a rookie.  His 4 first starts he was rocked, but he later came back and pitched well.  Can we really say he was incapable of being a starter?  

[Angel Oracle]

15 hours ago, Angelsjunky said:

^Not much to say after that from Mr. Fletcher.

I don't think Smith, Hoffman, Sutter etc should be in the Hall of Fame - especially over someone like Mike Mussina or Edgar Martinez. But the best closer in baseball history? Of course he should.

+1, except that Hoffman should be in the HOF too, although not as a first ballot guy.   Longevity, closing success (2nd alltime in saves, next one being 123 saves behind him), and of course Hell’s Bells.

[Pancake Bear]

3 hours ago, Rico said:

He had 10 starts as a rookie.  His 4 first starts he was rocked, but he later came back and pitched well.  Can we really say he was incapable of being a starter?  

Yes, we can. No one pitches relief if they can start. There’s not enough money in it. 

[Pancake Bear]

10 hours ago, Dochalo said:

Rivera's WPA - 55.09.  3rd overall since the stat could be recorded with data back to 1974.  

Clemens, Maddux, Rivera, Randy Johnson, Pedro Martinez, Kershaw, Halladay, Mussina, Smoltz, Schilling are the top 10.  

WPA takes leverage into account.  Leverage is highly discounted in WAR.  

While the save stat is flawed, pitching at the end of games when you're the last guy out and any sort of failure means a loss or potential loss for your team  matters and personally, I don't think WAR does a good job of taking that into account.  

Yeah, I think that makes up some of the difference. Also the fact that Rivera is the best at his (overrated) position is worth something. 

What bugs me is the talk of a unanimous vote for a guy who was great at what he did (but what he did was overvalued). 

[Pancake Bear]

11 hours ago, Blarg said:

So is a power hitting first baseman more important than defensive wizard shortstop? They are two completely different jobs with completely different roles. Dunn blasted way more home runs than Smith, racking up five seasons in a row hitting 40 dingers. Smith hit 28 in his entire career. 

You've lost focus. Rivera is the best at his craft like Ozzie Smith was as a shortstop. Mussina was really damn good at his job but not the best of his craft. Not exactly an Adam Dunn comp but the idea is the two had different roles while both were designated as playing similar positions, two infielders and two pitchers.

Of the two you are arguing the best player at his position isn't as valuable as a second tier player at another position simply by counting more innings as the deciding factor, not the overall skill set and accomplishment at their given role. 

Considering you aren’t telling me the numbers of the 1B or the defensive value of the SS, it’s impossible to say. Being good at a job no one else is doesn’t suddenly make you double your value in WAR. 

11 hours ago, Blarg said:

Let's get back to infuencing a games outcome. At the most Mussina pitched 33 games a season. His impact was limited to those outings, regardless of innings pitched.

Rivera averaged about 60 games per season. Almost twice as many instances where his skills were influencing the games outcome. Most of those innings we're the last which really is the games deciding factor since there is no time clock, only outs recorded. 

 

Mussina’s influence in those games was far higher. No one gives a crap about the ninth if someone doesn't get you into a better position to win. 

Is Rivera’s one inning more consequential than one of Mussina’s? Usually, yes. Two? Three? No. There’s a recent Verlander was pissed about Snell winning the Cy - pitching more innings is a lot harder. A position player can pitch one inning. Going through the order three times? That’s hard.  

[Rico]

40 minutes ago, Sean-Regan said:

Yes, we can. No one pitches relief if they can start. There’s not enough money in it. 

John Smoltz?

[Pancake Bear]

9 minutes ago, Rico said:

John Smoltz?

Aroldis Chapman, too, actually, to some degree. Should’ve said it’s extremely rare. I sincerely doubt he goes to the pen that quickly if they think Rivera has a future as a starter. His pitching repertoire suggests he wouldn’t be that successful through multiple times through the order. 

[ten ocho recon scout]

20 hours ago, failos said:

Ive always said that single was more significant than gibsons HR. Gibsons was a hollywood ending for sure. But a walk off, game 7, against the most untouchable RP (at the timr), against the dynasty yankees...that was pretty amazing.

[Vegas Halo Fan]

5 hours ago, Rico said:

John Smoltz?

Dennis Eckersley?

[Angel Oracle]

On 12/24/2018 at 11:45 AM, ten ocho recon scout said:

Ive always said that single was more significant than gibsons HR. Gibsons was a hollywood ending for sure. But a walk off, game 7, against the most untouchable RP (at the timr), against the dynasty yankees...that was pretty amazing.

Good point, although it was made easier by the Skanks playing the infield in with the winning run on 3rd with 1 out.

[m0nkey]

There's no hall of fame thread, but should Scott Rolen be a hall of famer? His raw numbers might say no, but I think there's a very good case you could make for him.

[NJHalo]

On 12/24/2018 at 1:44 PM, Sean-Regan said:

Yes, we can. No one pitches relief if they can start. There’s not enough money in it. 

Jim Johnson 

[nate]

I despise the Yankees but Mariano is the GOAT.  No other reliever has done what he did and for as long as he did.

[Mark68]

If I had a vote, Rivera would be on my ballot. 

My wife, the Chowd, only respected a few Yankees. Rivera was one of them, because he was excellent at what he did, but was also a class act. 

I would vote for him because he was the best at his particular craft. Ever. We can discuss the merits of the "save" stat and whether it's important, but let's not forget that a pitcher only earns the save (at least the "closer") if the tying run is at least on deck. So it could be considered high leverage by that virtue alone.

[Erstad Grit]

He's a hof. No question.  If Griffey didn't get 100% then Rivera should not.