Lucky Hall Of Famer Number 23 - Jack Morris

    Jack Morris has a 3.90 career ERA, and yet he is in the Hall of Fame. What? He pitched in a relatively easy era for pitchers, and still had an ERA of almost 4.00 and an adjusted ERA of 105. I don't even need to go through his career, his case is so obvious. To have an ERA that high and still be deserving of the Hall of Fame means that one has to put up a similar or better record during the 1920's and 1930's. Morris, who went 254-186 (.577) from 1977 through 1994, was basically an average pitcher who stuck around for a long time. 

    The reason why the 3,000 strikeout and 300 win cutoffs are in place is to keep Morris's type out of the Hall. Not only would a 300-186 pitcher with a 3.90 ERA in Morris's time be far in the lower tier among Hall of Famers, Morris doesn't even approach either of those two milestones (he has 2,478 strikeouts). 

    Here is the link to an interesting article that tries to defend Morris's case. 

https://www.cooperstowncred.com/jack-morris-deserves-his-hall-of-fame-plaque/

My opinion: Jack Morris is not a Hall of Famer. 

Lucky Hall Of Famer Number 22 - Herb Pennock

    Herb Pennock pitched from 1912 through 1934 and was remarkably inconsistent and definitely not at a Hall of Fame level. Let me explain why he was undeserving of the honor. 

    Pennock debuted in 1912 with the Philadelphia A's at the age of 18, and was a very poor pitcher until 1914, when he went 11-4 with a slightly below average ERA. Pennock continued to struggle until 1918, when he went into service with the U.S. Navy in World War I, and came back in 1919 to go 16-8 for the Red Sox. After that season, Pennock continued to pitch badly until 1923, his age 29 season, when he went 19-6 for the Yankees and led the AL in winning percentage. From 1923 through 1928, he did pitch like a Hall of Famer, as he went 115-57 (.669; albeit with the greatest hitting team in history) with a 3.03 ERA and 17 saves. In 1929, Pennock skidded to a halt, and pitched quite badly until 1934, when he went 2-0 with a 3.05 ERA in 62 innings at the age of 40. He never again pitched in the MLB after that season. 

    Pennock shouldn't be within 100 miles of Cooperstown. His record (241-162) looks good, but he had plenty of help from the Yankees' Murderers' Row lineup. Pennock pitched well for seven seasons and a tiny stint, and average at best in his other 14. His adjusted ERA is 106. Does this sound like a Hall of Famer to you? 

My opinion: Herb Pennock is not a Hall of Famer. 

Lucky Hall Of Famer Number 21 - Dick Williams

    Dick Williams is in the Hall of Fame as a manager. There are way too many managers in Cooperstown, and Williams may very well be the worst of them all. 

    Williams excited a lot of Boston fans in 1964 when he led the Red Sox to the AL Pennant in his first year as a manager. He managed the A's in 1971, 1972, and 1973, winning two World Series titles. He won 101 games in 1971 and led the Padres to the NL Pennant in 1984. 

    That's about it. Williams had some positively terrible seasons mixed in, going 72-89 with the Angels in 1975, 75-87 with the Montreal Expos in 1977, 76-86 in 1978, and 78-84 with the Mariners in 1987. Whenever he managed only part of a season, Williams had a very bad record, going 156-213 (.423). His overall record is 1,571-1,451-1 (.520). He was ejected 57 times in just over 3,000 games. 

My opinion: Dick Williams is not a Hall of Famer. 

Some Notes On Statistical Analysis

The use of statistics is the most useful and convenient way to rate players and teams, simply put. However, not all statistics are perfect, and some shouldn't even exist. For example, when I was ten years old, if I saw a pitcher take the mound in relief and win the game, I would have thought that he'd earned a save (I thought that wins were exclusive to starters). This makes a lot of sense because he really did save the game. If I saw a reliever earn a save, I'd think that he'd gotten a hold (an unofficial statistic for middle relievers), because he merely held onto a lead. The lead wasn't of his doing. I think that it would make sense to disallow every save in MLB history, change the definition of a save, and only credit saves to pitchers who get the ball in relief and don't blow it, as long as he closes out a game that is really in danger of being lost, if it is a one run game or if it is a two run game and there are two runners in scoring position. Then there will be many, many fewer saves, but to earn a save would not only be meaningful, but praiseworthy (to a reasonable extent, of course). The best part is that we would never have to fight over whether 300 or 500 or 652 saves makes someone a Hall of Famer. We could look at a reliever and say, "If this guy has 100 or so saves, a reasonable ERA, and rarely (<25%) blew a save, then he's a Hall of Famer." Do you see how simple this becomes? 

I also believe that catchers should get credit for blocking what would be scored a wild pitch and preventing a baserunner from advancing. The only problem is that the scorekeeper would have to score the pitch a wild pitch or a passed ball anyway. Ugh, thinking! Even though this statistic would come at so great a price as to think, everyone would have a better understanding of how good each catcher was defensively in an important spot. 

Pickoffs are important. I think that pickoffs should become official statistics for pitchers, catchers, and baserunners, and that they should help to adjust some other statistics. If a batter can make it to first base but out of his own clumsiness can't stay there, then he's as good off as if he'd gotten out at bat. You know, the way we statisticians score the best hitters is by measuring the amount of runs he produces in the fewest number of outs. If a runner is picked off, then that should count against him as an out in determining how good an offensive player he was. Pickoffs are worth counting, as they are even better for the defending team than a strikeout (because they take away a baserunner and an out). 

If a pitcher makes an error (especially a throwing error) and the runner scores, I think that the run should be earned, since the run scored only through the pitcher's own fault. 

That a hit by pitch raises a batter's on base percentage and a catcher's interference does not is the silliest thing that I've ever heard. They both result in the batter being deprived of a chance to hit, and both allow the batter to automatically advance to first. Pitchers used to intentionally hit batters and catchers used to purposely mess up batters' swings, and both moves instigated rule changes. I think that a catcher's interference should raise a batter's OBP, exactly like a hit by pitch. They also should not be called errors on the catcher, but classified on their own. 

Finally, if a sacrifice fly lowers a batter's on base percentage, then it should lower his batting average, too. I am not saying that it necessarily has to lower the batter's average (because sometimes a manager will ask the batter simply to hit a long fly), but if it doesn't, then it shouldn't affect his OBP, either. The batter didn't make a hit or get on base. However, because he did something good for his team, perhaps on purpose, in hitting a sacrifice fly, the play may not need to lower any of his rate statistics. I will not say whether a sacrifice fly should or shouldn't lower a player's average or OBP, but the fact that he did hit one should affect both statistics, not just on base percentage. 

NOTE: This is a post that will likely be edited and added to after publication, so check it again in a month or two. I also apologize for any confusion that this lining issue has caused. It is a common problem for me for some reason, so please bear with me. 

Lucky Hall Of Famer Number 20 - Jim Bunning

    Jim Bunning pitched from 1955 through 1971 for four clubs, having his best years with the Detroit Tigers and the Philadelphia Phillies. He went 224-184 (.549) with a 3.27 ERA in the most pitcher friendly era in history. This is not a Hall of Fame career. Let's first look over his career, and then see why he is not a Hall of Famer. 

    Bunning got started in 1955 with Detroit and struggled as a rookie, turning in an ERA of 6.35 in 51 innings. He went 5-1 in 1956, however, and had a career year in 1957 with a 20-8 mark and a 2.69 ERA. Bunning slumped in his next two seasons, but came back in 1960 with a 2.79 ERA. He then had two good (but not great) seasons and one in which he was below average, which "earned" him a trade to the Phillies. At 32, he was thought to be through, but he had the best four seasons of his career in Philly, posting a 2.48 ERA and a .617 winning percentage. He even pitched a perfect game in 1964. After this, he had a sharp decline. He followed four fantastic seasons with four in which he went 32-51 with an ERA of 4.14. He was gone by 1972. After his baseball career, he became a politician. In 1986, he was elected to the United States House of Representatives from the 4th congressional district of Kentucky. From 1987 through 1999 he served in the House, and later served two terms as the Republican junior United States Senator. In 1996, with ten years of political experience under his belt, he was inducted into the Hall of Fame by the Veterans' Committee. His career as a politician almost assuredly helped boost him into Cooperstown. 

    Jim Bunning had a nice baseball career and a great comeback story. However, he had only two Hall of Fame worthy seasons (1957 and 1960) before his four year run from 1964 through 1967 in which he pitched at a Hall of Fame level. Six great seasons and 11 average seasons do not add up to a Hall of Fame career. Bunning was also a very unpopular player. After his perfect game, he complained about the seats that the Mets gave his family. This shouldn't exclude him from Cooperstown, but it makes him a much less attractive candidate. 

My opinion: Jim Bunning is not a Hall of Famer. 

Lucky Hall Of Famer Number Number 19 - Phil Rizzuto

    Phil Rizzuto was a fine defensive shortstop for the Yankees from 1941 through 1942 and from 1946 through 1956, taking three seasons off in service to the U.S. Navy in World War II. He was not only a good defensive shortstop, but he batted .273 lifetime and was a very good bunter. Rizzuto also stole bases, accumulating 149 in his career. 

    All this is nice, but nothing stands out as deserving the Hall of Fame. Firstly, Rizzuto is often called the greatest bunter of all time. It's true that he bunted not only to sacrifice but to collect singles, and that he led the MLB in sacrifice hits four years in a row, but he totaled only 193 in his career. Compared with Hall of Famer Eddie Collins, who had 512 (and also bunted for hits) and many, many others, Rizzuto was not a good bunter. Secondly, Rizzuto, typically the Yankee leadoff hitter, scored 100 runs in a season only twice, in 1949 and 1950. He also hit into a lot of double plays for a leadoff hitter, bouncing into 107 in a short career of only 1,661 games (an average of ten per 162 games), including 18 in 1949. Thirdly, Rizzuto, the 1950 AL MVP (.324, 7 home runs, 66 RBI's) was lucky to beat out teammate Yogi Berra (.322, 28, 124) or fellow shortstop Vern Stephens (.295, 30, 144). Fourthly, Rizzuto slashed .273/.351/.355 in the regular season, good only for an adjusted OPS of 93. He topped the league average of 100 in only four of his 13 seasons. Finally, in the World Series, when the Yankees needed him most, Rizzuto hit .246/.355/.295 with 45 hits in 52 games. He batted .111 in the 1941 World Series, .167 in 1949, .143 in 1950, and .148 in 1952. 

My opinion: Phil Rizzuto is not a Hall of Famer. 

Lucky Hall Of Famer Number 18 - Gaylord Perry

    Gaylord Perry has a Hall of Fame worthy resume. Despite his .542 winning percentage and other iffy statistics, Perry won 314 games, which ordinarily would be enough for a plaque. However, Perry has admitted to using an illegal spitball, which not only made him a dirty cheater and a man not deserving of fame, but it also peppered his statistics. Perry said that in 1964, "I had to use it or get out of baseball. That's how bad I was going." It's true - in 1962 and 1963, Perry went 4-7 for great Giants teams with a 4.46 ERA. Suddenly, he put up a 2.75 ERA in 1964 and wound up in Cooperstown. 

    Perry never denied throwing the spitball. He even wrote a book about it called Me and the Spitter. But the "spitter" is an ILLEGAL pitch. It was outlawed almost 20 years before he was born and over 40 years before he started pitching in the Big Leagues. Therefore, any pitcher who uses it is none other than a cheater. A final word: CHEATERS DO NOT BELONG IN COOPERSTOWN. 

My opinion: Gaylord Perry is not a Hall of Famer.