[Dagrims]

Mike Mussina

Is this an automatic, or are there doubts? From what I consider to be the typical voter's perspective (meaning I don't necessarily subscribe to each of the pros and/or cons):

Pros: Very strong ERA+, great K/BB ratio (ninth best all-time), fantastic winning percentage, six Gold Gloves, eight times in the top six of Cy Young voting, very high profile pitcher, lots of grey ink (top 10 leaderboard appearances)

Cons: almost never led the league in anything, zero Cy Young awards, no 20-win seasons, not many complete games, allows a lot of hits and homeruns, not a great personality, career not long enough to amass significant counting stat totals, similar pitchers listed include a number of borderline HOF candidates or non-candidates, part of four ALCS losing teams and two World Series losing teams, arguably never the best pitcher in the league in any season

I'd vote him in.

[Eckstein 4 Prez]

Yes. Should be automatic, but given the knowledge level of the voters it may take him some time.

[TotalEnd98]

I'm sure there's a rational reason that some people think Mike Mussina is not a Hall of Famer.

I, however, have not yet heard it.

[ZXLT]

I think he needs a few more years. The peak years really aren't there. All he can do now is boost his career value. He's always been a good pitcher, but the black ink isn't there.

Right now, guys like Curt Schilling and Kevin Brown are on the outside looking in, and they've had far more dominating years than Mussina has.

[sebastian0622]

Originally Posted by TotalEnd98

I'm sure there's a rational reason that some people think Mike Mussina is not a Hall of Famer.

I, however, have not yet heard it.

A good rationale is that Mussina has been very good, but was he ever great? Was he ever one of the top three pitchers that you'd select to pitch one game for you? Would we be having this conversation if he spent his career with the Detroit Tigers? Then, of course, the usual arguments: should the Hall of Fame be more for players who were very good for a longer perior or better than that for a shorter period? Should it be the hall of Mussinas or the hall of Schillings? Or both?

I'd put Moose in, but I don't think it's necessarily crystal clear.

[Johnny Slick]

I'm pretty close to sebastian on this one. He's consistently been the 4th or 5th best pitcher in the AL, but never *the* best. If he's a HOFer, he's Richie Ashburn, not Willie, Mickey, or the Duke. Don't get me wrong, Ashburn's a great player too, but he's definitely not in the Inner Circle and from year to year I'd have to think about who he was up against in terms of voting. Would he be the first HOF starting pitcher never to win 20? Yes, wins are overrated, but in this case it's a great example of his not-quite dominance.

In order to make him an absolute lock, I think he needs to reach some more milestones. 250 wins would be nice. We also haven't seen the downside of his career yet; that may have contributed to Bert Blyleven's not being in, so I wouldn't be surprised, if Moose stunk it up for the next 4-5 years, he'd end up on the outside looking in too.

[Joshv02]

Originally Posted by sebastian0622

Was he ever one of the top three pitchers that you'd select to pitch one game for you?

1992, 1994, 1995, possibly 2001.

[TotalEnd98]

Originally Posted by ZXLT

I think he needs a few more years. The peak years really aren't there. All he can do now is boost his career value. He's always been a good pitcher, but the black ink isn't there.

Right now, guys like Curt Schilling and Kevin Brown are on the outside looking in, and they've had far more dominating years than Mussina has.

Mike Mussina: 217-123, 3.55 dERA, 1062 prevented runs above replacement, 107.3 WARP1 in 426 G. 127 ERA+.
Kevin Brown: 211-143, 3.66 dERA, 1092 PRAR, 107.1 WARP1 in 483 G. 130 ERA+.
Curt Schilling: 185-125, 3.46 dERA, 1020 PRAR, 93.5 WARP1 in 485 G. 131 ERA+.

As for "more dominating years," Mussina's most dominant year garnered him a 163 ERA+. Schilling's best was last year's 159. Brown had an amazing 214, plus a 169 and 167, but it's worth noting that all three came in the NL. His best full-season AL ERA+ is 136. Mussina's two years younger than Schilling, four younger than Brown.

Mussina in, Brown borderline/looking in, Schilling out. Still looking for a good reason why Mussina might be out.

[Johnny Slick]

Originally Posted by Joshv02

1992,

Maddux, Clemens, Kevin Appier.

1994,

Maddux (actually you could split Maddux in 2 that year and I would put both half-Madduxes ahead of Moose),Clemens, David Cone. Steve Ontiveros had a better ERA+ that year but I wouldn't say I'd rather have him pitch a big game than Mussina.

1995,

Maddux, Randy Johnson, Tim Wakefield (seriously, Wakefield was aces in 1995)

possibly 2001.

That may be the only year of those 4 where Mussina has a serious case to be included in the top 3. Only Randy Johnson And Curt Schilling were demonstrably better.

[TotalEnd98]

Originally Posted by sebastian0622

A good rationale is that Mussina has been very good, but was he ever great?

Yes. Next question.

Originally Posted by sebastian0622

Was he ever one of the top three pitchers that you'd select to pitch one game for you?

Yes. Next question.

Originally Posted by sebastian0622

Would we be having this conversation if he spent his career with the Detroit Tigers?

We're already having a version of this discussion. The knock you hear against Mussina most often is that he's never won 20 games. I don't think that's enough of a knock to keep him out.

Originally Posted by sebastian0622

Should it be the hall of Mussinas or the hall of Schillings?

Hmm... the Hall of "Hall of Famers" or the Hall of "Not Quite Hall of Famers?" I'll go with the first option, Regis.

[Johnny Slick]

dola,

Originally Posted by TotalEnd98

As for "more dominating years," Mussina's most dominant year garnered him a 163 ERA+. Schilling's best was last year's 159. Brown had an amazing 214, plus a 169 and 167, but it's worth noting that all three came in the NL. His best full-season AL ERA+ is 136. Mussina's two years younger than Schilling, four younger than Brown.

You're aware that ERA+ takes into account league ERA and therefore the DH, right? Kevin Brown's best ERA+ seasons are in the NL because that's when he was at his peak, not because the competition was easier or something.

[TotalEnd98]

Originally Posted by Johnny Slick

dola,You're aware that ERA+ takes into account league ERA and therefore the DH, right? Kevin Brown's best ERA+ seasons are in the NL because that's when he was at his peak, not because the competition was easier or something.

Yes, I am. It was just a note.

[TotalEnd98]

dola

Top 5 season each by WARP3:
Mussina: 10.2, 9.8, 9.6, 9.5, 8.8
Brown: 11.3, 9.8, 9.1, 8.7, 8.5

When you go for the complex stats, Brown's numbers look substantially less remarkable when compared to Mussina's.

[Joshv02]

Originally Posted by Johnny Slick

Maddux, Clemens, Kevin Appier.

Ehh, they are all reasonable, but I can't see why you'd take Appier over him. You can make a reasonable argument either way.

Originally Posted by Johnny Slick

Maddux (actually you could split Maddux in 2 that year and I would put both half-Madduxes ahead of Moose),Clemens, David Cone. Steve Ontiveros had a better ERA+ that year but I wouldn't say I'd rather have him pitch a big game than Mussina.

I don't see why Cone is better, and Ontiveros had 115 innings 4.4 SO per. Again, I can see a reasonable argument for Johnson and Sabs, though. It would be reasonable to say any of those 6 (or maybe 7) guys -- or, really, it would be reasonable to say any of the 4 (or maybe 5) after Clemens and Maddux.

Originally Posted by Johnny Slick

Maddux, Randy Johnson, Tim Wakefield (seriously, Wakefield was aces in 1995)

Wakes had fewer SO and more BB. I can see someone claiming Nomo was better, tho. Again, it is reasonable to put Moose in this bunch.

[Johnny Slick]

Originally Posted by TotalEnd98

Yes, I am. It was just a note.

And Kevin Brown still had a higher peak than Mussina. To me, Moose is more comparable to a guy like Don Sutton than to a guy like Roger Clemens. Actually, Mussina has been a bit better than Sutton so far (Sutton was 230-175 with a 115 ERA+ through his age 35 season), but they're actually not too far apart.

[Joshv02]

Originally Posted by Johnny Slick

Moose is more comparable to a guy like Don Sutton than to a guy like Roger Clemens.

Who said he is comparable to Clemens?

[Skipaway]

Originally Posted by Joshv02

Who said he is comparable to Clemens?

Therefore, an easy way to leave Mussina out is simply claiming to be a small Hall believer.

[Joshv02]

Originally Posted by Skipaway

Therefore, an easy way to leave Mussina out is simply claiming to be a small Hall believer.

Sure. If the comp must be Clemens, tho, it will be small hall indeed!

[Johnny Slick]

Originally Posted by Joshv02

Ehh, they are all reasonable, but I can't see why you'd take Appier over him. You can make a reasonable argument either way.

Appier has a better ERA+ and better K and W numbers. The only thing Moose has going for him that year is his W-L record. Personally, I find it disingenuous to argue that W-L is meaningless in one respect (his overall record) and then say that it's meaningful in this one (his record vs. Appier).

I don't see why Cone is better, and Ontiveros had 115 innings 4.4 SO per.

You don't see how Cone's lower ERA in more or less the same offensive environment makes him a better pitcher? It's close, but if I had to pick, I'd go with Cone.

Again, I can see a reasonable argument for Johnson and Sabs, though.

I'd hope you can find a reasonable argument for Randy because he was clearly better than Mussina that year.

It would be reasonable to say any of those 6 (or maybe 7) guys -- or, really, it would be reasonable to say any of the 4 (or maybe 5) after Clemens and Maddux.Wakes had fewer SO and more BB.

Wakes is a knuckleballer and subject to different criteria than just Ks and BBs.

I can see someone claiming Nomo was better, tho. Again, it is reasonable to put Moose in this bunch.

It's reasonable, but if you absolutely had to pick 3, I wouldn't include Mussina on the list. Again, I think he's a HOFer right now, but it's REALLY close, and he's got a lot of career left.

[TotalEnd98]

Originally Posted by Skipaway

Therefore, an easy way to leave Mussina out is simply claiming to be a small Hall believer.

If Clemens is your baseline, you're going to have a HoF of about five people. That's pretty far from rational.