Chicago Cubs: Hall of Fame Discussion

[Easy Mac]

I'll give a poll of the 3 players I think are most likely to make the Hall of Fame. Of course, some (most) teams won't come close to the criteria for the hall, so most of the time it will be the 3 best career on the team. It should be an interesting discussion for some teams, pretty boring for others (See AZ). Also, as an added bonus, I may occasionally do more than 1 set of 3 players for a team. Very rare, there may be a couple of teams who have more than 3 guys who could be hall-worthy. In that case, I'll think of something. So here we go. The poll choices will hopefully be obvious, but who knows. Go here to see everyone we've voted in.

Greg Maddux: Loathe him as I do, I'm pretty sure we're all in agreement that he is a lock for the Hall. Currently he has 312 wins and a 2.99 ERA for his career. 4 straight Cy Youngs, 14 of the 15 last gold gloves. Lock.

Nomar Garciaparra: Wow, 2 years ago and this would have been an easy question. Now, it's gotten a bit tougher. He has more HR, RBI, 2B, 3B, and a higher average than Jeter, but he's missing a ring or 2. Not to mention the Red Sox won as soon as he was gone. I think if he stops being a pussy and puts up somewhat Nomar numbers the rest of his career, he's in. He's kind of like Ken Griffey Jr, only he didn't put up as good a numbers as Jr. did, so his margin for error is a bit less. So in conclusion, I doubt he'll get in unless he stops being a whale's vagina.

Aramis Ramirez: I didn't anticipate a tough 3rd choice for the Cubs until I actually looked at the roster and saw, there aren't a lot of good, older guys. So Ramirez is chosen by default (see below why others weren't). He's 27, and should have 160 HR by years end. He's entering his prime, so I expect 35-45 HR seasons for the next 6-7 years (at least). So he could end up aroun 500 HR or so. If he gets there, he'll be in, but its too soon to tell with this one. A very talented player, but give it until his early 30's to make a better judgement.

Too Young (or injured) to tell:
Mark Prior: No one disputes he has talent, but he also has a large vagina. Stay healthy, and he has a chance at a great career.

Kerry Wood: Its probably too late to salvage a career as a HOF starter. Could be an outstanding closer with his fastball.

Carlos Zambrano Only 24 and an outstanding pitcher, could be like Prior, and I don't think he has a penchant for being a little bitch.

Derek Lee: If he continues to put up 05 numbers for his career, then he'll get to be an interesting pick, but I doubt he'll have a chance.

[Radii]

Put me in the maddux only camp, with prayers and daily sacrafices to the injury gods that a) Dusty Baker gets fired and b) Mark Prior magically becomes more durable and that in a few years he'll be on a list like this.

[Cuckoo]

Well, I voted Maddux and Ramirez. I know it's far too soon to know something like this, but that's kind of the point I guess.

In my opinion, Ramirez has all the tools to be a future Hall of Famer. Obviously, nobody can anticipate injuries, but if he remains healthy I think he'll be there. I feel similarly about Prior and Zambrano. All are young enough and have shown that they can put up the numbers.

Wood has just missed too much time and is too old at this point to be considered a HOFer, and Lee is already almost 30 which would mean he'd have to have years like he's having this year for a very good stretch to get there. I don't think it'll happen.

Just curious, Easy Mac, why do you dislike Maddux? I'm not sure if I've ever known anyone that hated Maddux.

[Swaggs]

I voted for Whale's Vagina...sorry, I mean Greg Maddux.

[sterlingice]

A couple of friends and I were talking about best player of the era, and Clemens gets the automatic nod from "critics"- hell, even a lot of "best pitcher of all time" stuff and even Bill James was talking about it in the historical abstract. None of us really got it- we figured there were 4 pitchers in the argument (for "best of era") and those were Clemens, Maddux, Martinez, and Johnson. Each has their "warts" in this argument- Clemens really had that erratic "on year/off year" pattern for quite a while, Maddux had some high IP seasons early in his career with mediocre numbers to skew his stats, Martinez hasn't pitched as long as the other three so let's see some stats in those "older" years, and Johnson didn't get good until he was nearly 30. We just didn't understand the love affair with Clemens.

SI

[Barkeep49]

I can't say I'm a fan of the choices here. I think Wood or Prior and Lee belong on that list before Aramis.

[Raven Hawk]

I think Zambrano and Garciaparra have an outside chance. I don't think Ramirez can hold this kind of production long enough to get the promised land. Wood and Prior are too injury prone to rack up enough wins to get there.

[Warhammer]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

A couple of friends and I were talking about best player of the era, and Clemens gets the automatic nod from "critics"- hell, even a lot of "best pitcher of all time" stuff and even Bill James was talking about it in the historical abstract. None of us really got it- we figured there were 4 pitchers in the argument (for "best of era") and those were Clemens, Maddux, Martinez, and Johnson. Each has their "warts" in this argument- Clemens really had that erratic "on year/off year" pattern for quite a while, Maddux had some high IP seasons early in his career with mediocre numbers to skew his stats, Martinez hasn't pitched as long as the other three so let's see some stats in those "older" years, and Johnson didn't get good until he was nearly 30. We just didn't understand the love affair with Clemens.

SI

I think the whole reason why there is the love affair with Clemens is he is a power pitcher, he played for the two biggest teams in baseball (Red Sox and Yanks), and he was an ass, for which he got labeled a fierce competitor.

[Vince]

I completely and totally brain farted on the vote here. Not that it matters, but I voted on Ramirez and Maddux instead of just Maddux.

[Crapshoot]

Clemens, whatever you may think of him, is one of the 5 best pitchers in the history of baseball. As much as I love Maddux, who's also top 10 - Clemens is significantly better.
Of course, in terms of peak value, Pedro is the best pitcher we have ever known.

[vtbub]

Maddux, of those you listed.

[Ragone]

I have a hard time believing clemens is one of the 5 best in the HISTORY of baseball..

lets see

Bob Gibson
Sandy Koufax
Cy Young
Nolan Ryan
Walter Johnson

Just to name a few

[st.cronin]

I think Garciaparra has a decent chance to make the Hall. His career is obviously in a down cycle these days, but a modest comeback, and he could end up with an Ernie Banks type career.

[vtbub]

Originally Posted by Ragone

I have a hard time believing clemens is one of the 5 best in the HISTORY of baseball..

lets see

Bob Gibson
Sandy Koufax
Cy Young
Nolan Ryan
Walter Johnson

Just to name a few

He's got a shot next year to pass Warren Spahn's win total of 363. I would rank him behind Young and Johnson and ahead of everybody else.

[Crapshoot]

Originally Posted by Ragone

I have a hard time believing clemens is one of the 5 best in the HISTORY of baseball..

lets see

Bob Gibson
Sandy Koufax
Cy Young
Nolan Ryan
Walter Johnson

Just to name a few

Roffle- Ryan is the most overrated pitcher in baseball - and Koufax is a close second. Ryan has a career ERA+ of 112 - a K/BB ratio of about 2 for his career. Koufax, while very good, had a short career, and had 4 really dominating seasons - his peak value comes close (but still short of) Clemens, but his career value isn't even close. Clemens has a career ERA+ of 141 going into what's supposed to be the downswing of his career- that's frigging amazing. He has a career K/BB ratio of 3 , significantly better than Ryan or Koufax. Gibson is good, but again- not in Clemens' class. Young and Walter Johhnson are the two with reasonable arguements - Walt may be the best pitcher of all time. Clemens ranks 4th on my list, behind Johnson, Grove and Young.

[primelord]

Originally Posted by Crapshoot

Roffle- Ryan is the most overrated pitcher in baseball - and Koufax is a close second. Ryan has a career ERA+ of 112 - a K/BB ratio of about 2 for his career. Koufax, while very good, had a short career, and had 4 really dominating seasons - his peak value comes close (but still short of) Clemens, but his career value isn't even close. Clemens has a career ERA+ of 141 going into what's supposed to be the downswing of his career- that's frigging amazing. He has a career K/BB ratio of 3 , significantly better than Ryan or Koufax. Gibson is good, but again- not in Clemens' class. Young and Walter Johhnson are the two with reasonable arguements - Walt may be the best pitcher of all time. Clemens ranks 4th on my list, behind Johnson, Grove and Young.

Why aren't ypu putting Maddux there with Clemens then? You seem to have decided to use ERA+ and K/BB ratio as the two numbers to rank the pitchers. I am not aguing with that, but going by those Maddux also has a 141 ERA+, but has a higher K/BB ratio than Clemens.

[primelord]

Dola,

Not to mention Pedro has a career ERA+ of 167 and has a K/BB ratio of over 4.

[VPI97]

Originally Posted by primelord

Why aren't ypu putting Maddux there with Clemens then? You seem to have decided to use ERA+ and K/BB ratio as the two numbers to rank the pitchers. I am not aguing with that, but going by those Maddux also has a 141 ERA+, but has a higher K/BB ratio than Clemens.

Using ERA+ & K/BB, Randy Johnson should be rated higher than Clemens, too.

[primelord]

Double Dola,

You also said Clemens had a career K/BB ratio that was significantly better than Koufax. What's your definition of significant? Clemens' K/BB ratio is 2.967 (not 3 like you said) and Koufax's K/BB ratio is 2.933.

[Crapshoot]

Originally Posted by primelord

Dola,

Not to mention Pedro has a career ERA+ of 167 and has a K/BB ratio of over 4.

Hey, I think Pedro has the highest peak of any pitcher ever - but his ERA+ is likely to head downwards as he enters the downside of his career.

[Crapshoot]

Originally Posted by primelord

Why aren't ypu putting Maddux there with Clemens then? You seem to have decided to use ERA+ and K/BB ratio as the two numbers to rank the pitchers. I am not aguing with that, but going by those Maddux also has a 141 ERA+, but has a higher K/BB ratio than Clemens.

Yes - they are very close- I'm certain Maddux is top 10, and may be well be no 5. I If I had the time, I'd calculate a quick and dirty career BAPIP - because I think (but am not certain) that Clemens had to play with defenses that weren't as good as Maddux's behind him. That being said, I certainly think the Maddux > Clemens arguement has a good case. Plus, at this point in their careers Clemens has slightly more career value (about a season more of innings pitched).

[Crapshoot]

Originally Posted by primelord

Double Dola,

You also said Clemens had a career K/BB ratio that was significantly better than Koufax. What's your definition of significant? Clemens' K/BB ratio is 2.967 (not 3 like you said) and Koufax's K/BB ratio is 2.933.

Good catch- that was my mistake- that was just in reference to Ryan- not Koufax. the arguement with Koufax is both on peak and career value.

[Crapshoot]

Originally Posted by VPI97

Using ERA+ & K/BB, Randy Johnson should be rated higher than Clemens, too.

Combined with career value - Johnson has about a 1000 innings less than Clemens so far in his career. Johnson's a HOF and probably a top 20 pitcher - but the advantage in ERA+ and K/BB isn't enough to make up for 5 seasons of peak value pitching.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by Crapshoot

Hey, I think Pedro has the highest peak of any pitcher ever - but his ERA+ is likely to head downwards as he enters the downside of his career.

This was actually my argument when I was talking to a friend who was advocating Pedro (from the discussion above which started this). Sure he has the rate stats, but wait until he's pitched long enough to have the counting stats and let's see where he is then.

SI

[ISiddiqui]

We'll see about Pedro. It seems moving to the NL was good for him. Hell, he even beat the Yankees . It may allow him to continue pitching at a high level. Though even HE can't match the Pedro of the late 90s. No one can grab that peak value.

Ryan is totally overrated. He's not in my Top 5. He's not in my Top 10. Clemens, Maddux, and Pedro are all in my Top 10. As to whether Maddux or Clemens is better, that's a toss-up. I prefer Maddux, but I can definetly see the argument that Clemens is doing far better in his tail end.

Btw, I voted for Maddux and Ramirez. I think Ramirez, as long as he stays healthy, will be able to put up good numbers, especially HR until his late 30s. That should get him in, but, it is too early to tell, really.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Ryan is totally overrated. He's not in my Top 5. He's not in my Top 10. Clemens, Maddux, and Pedro are all in my Top 10. As to whether Maddux or Clemens is better, that's a toss-up. I prefer Maddux, but I can definetly see the argument that Clemens is doing far better in his tail end.

Yeah, Ryan is overrated because most of his claims to fame are that he pitched so long. That said, I'm not sure anyone's catching that strikeout record for a very very very long time.

Again, my problem with Clemens is that his bad years were during his peak times. It's expected that Maddux would slow down some as he gets to be 40, but Clemens had downright average years at age 30, 32, and 36- and, frankly, I can hardly blame the Red Sox for letting him go. If he doesn't get that swift kick in the ass, he's not even on the Top 100 pitchers list- hell, he stays in Toronto instead of going to New York, we aren't even talking this "best pitcher of all time" nonsense, but that's another story for another day. Maddux's worst years were at 22, 24, 25, 37, and 38. His peak from 94-98 were light years better than any stretch Clemens could muster and his best year (1994) had a psychotically good 273 ERA+ and he still had 202 IPs in the strike shortened year.

SI

[ISiddiqui]

I don't think it should matter that Clemens had his worst years during his 'peak'. Even with all those bad years during the peak, he still has the same career ERA+ as Maddux. That means he did that much better than Maddux during both of their non-peak years. And few 40+ year olds have done it as good.