Barry Larkin, and Only Barry Larkin, Has Been Inducted Into the Hall of Fame
The 2012 baseball Hall of Fame inductees have been announced, and by inductees what I really mean is inductee in former Reds shortstop Barry Larkin, who has arrived to Cooperstown all by his lonesome, receiving a vote of 86%.
Jeff Bagwell and his explosive goatee have been shunned for now (56%), as has Jack Morris, who was entering his 13th year on the ballot. Morris did get closer this year (67%) so he’s got a good chance at getting in next year. If not, it’s in the hands of the hilarious Veteran’s Committee, a team of writers and executives who specialize in sympathy. Yes, that’s how this lovely process works. Honestly, after learning Morris pitched an astounding 293.2 innings in 1983 to go along with 20 complete games, I’m confused as to why he wasn’t inducted following that season.
As for Larkin, he played wonderful defense for 19 seasons in Cincinnati and finished with a career OPS of .815, but most of us will point to the nine Silver Sluggers sitting atop his mantel as the hypnotizing nugget that swayed voters in his favor.
If you listened to some of the explanation on the MLB Network from Ken Rosensquirrel, Tom Verducci, Peter Gammons and Jon Heyman, you now have a profound understanding that it’s next to impossible to understand the philosophy that goes into the voting process. Perfect example comes from Gammons, who stated that he has voted for Jack Morris three times, however this year he did not. You may now light your eyelashes on fire.
[Photo via Getty]

- LeBron James and Paul George’s Epic Game 1 Battle Looks Even Cooler in Slow Motion [Video]
- Manchester City Players Were Super Excited To Catch Passes From Eli Manning [Video]
- Miami Heat Remix of Pitbull’s “Feel This Moment?” Dále!
- Buffalo Bills Fan Has O.J. Simpson Mug Shot Tattoo on His Thigh
- Fox Sports 1 Heavily in Pursuit of Former NFL Player Trevor Pryce and ESPN Chicago’s Sarah Spain

- pRohphet8 on Premier League: What Each Club Should Prioritize in the Summer
- A.P. on Miami Heat Remix of Pitbull's "Feel This Moment?" Dále!
- scripty on Miami Heat Remix of Pitbull's "Feel This Moment?" Dále!
- A.P. on NFL Coaches Using Microsoft Tablets on the Sidelines in the Future Should Lead to Advances in Clock Management and Strategy
- A.P. on Miami Heat Remix of Pitbull's "Feel This Moment?" Dále!
160 Responses to “Barry Larkin, and Only Barry Larkin, Has Been Inducted Into the Hall of Fame”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.






January 9th, 2012 at 3:10 PM
unlike bert blyleven he wasn’t a whiny little bitch every time he got passed over.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:11 PM
56% for Bagwell, will probably stagnate until Biggio comes onto ballot in 2014. Raines getting a huge boost is well deserved.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:13 PM
I really hope Rock Raines gets in.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:14 PM
I guess after Blyleven they’ll let just about anybody in.
Can’t wait to see the results of next year’s ballot:
Clemens
Bonds
Piazza
Sosa
Schilling
Biggio
January 9th, 2012 at 3:14 PM
That boom mic looks like a bib or some sort of really bad furry tie in the photo.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:14 PM
I wonder why Barry Larkin gets in but Alan Trammell gets little support. Virtually the same player.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:17 PM
HOF needs a playoff.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:17 PM
Bonds & Clemens should get in, but won’t because the “moralists” won’t allow them to be on the first ballot. Piazza will probably get 65%, Sosa in the 20%s, Biggio is a lock. Schilling will get around 55-60%
January 9th, 2012 at 3:19 PM
because of those “moralists” not voting for Clemens and Bonds, i could see a number closer to 75% for Schilling.
I think there’s more HOF voters that would deny due to steroids and send a message by voting in guys w/o steroid use.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:20 PM
I think Schilling gets in 1st ballot.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:20 PM
Think voters held off on Bags this time so that he and Biggio can enter together next year? Wouldn’t surprise me at all.
Bonds should be in, but won’t. The writers will want to make their “statement” and keep him out of the first ballot list.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:20 PM
Morris couldn’t beat Iowa State this year.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:21 PM
this has been my argument on here for about 3 years.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:21 PM
He will then eat said ballot.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:21 PM
That boom mic looks like a bib or some sort of really bad furry tie in the photo.
+1
Pay The HOF!
January 9th, 2012 at 3:21 PM
You can call me a homer if you want, but I fully believe Sammy Sosa should be elected to the Hall of Fame. 100% a steroid user and I even hated him during his final couple seasons as a Cub. Still, he was a HoF calibre player. I’d vote him in.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:22 PM
He’s got one year left. Next year, or beg to the Veteran’s Committee.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:22 PM
Has Barry officially filed retirement papers with MLB?
January 9th, 2012 at 3:23 PM
if peter gammons never votes for jack morris again, then i suppose what he’s saying is that he doesn’t think that he’s worthy if he hasn’t gotten in by now. that’s something which – if i squint really hard while staring at – i can at least understand.
but if he votes for him again in the future, then yes…i will have to light my eyelashes on fire. which sounds really painful.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:23 PM
Then they need to have their voting privleges revoked. Base it off the numbers, not anything else. Stop trying to admit that the steroid era didn’t happen.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:23 PM
I did a double take on the author of this post, as Ken Rosensquirrel is an all time classic.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:24 PM
Is the Big Hurt on the ballot next year or is it the first year after you’ve been out for 5?
January 9th, 2012 at 3:24 PM
So whatever happened to Bill Conlin raping those children?
January 9th, 2012 at 3:25 PM
The haircut in the above picture should have been enough to get him in.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:25 PM
Agree with this. It’s not like these guys were the ONLY guys in baseball doing it, they were just the biggest names and in the spotlight because of their talents and abilities already. They were still performing above and beyond all the other steroid users.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:25 PM
He’s up in 2014. Better get in first ballot. Maybe Rock will finally get in with him. They were on some really good Sox teams in the early 90s.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:26 PM
Thanks Hawkeye, it’s updated.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:26 PM
Is the Big Hurt on the ballot next year or is it the first year after you’ve been out for 5?
Man, I loved the Big Hurt. He also had wonderfully ugly shoes in the early\mid 90s. The ugliness prompted a stranger at the store to say to me, while I had them on — “Big Hurt! They Big Hurt my eyes!” Good times.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:26 PM
I’m glad for Larkin, having grown up a Reds fan, but the fact that he gets in and Trammel is completely overlooked is baffling.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:26 PM
Seeing how the Astros don’t have anybody in HOF yet, only fitting if they went in at same time.
Don’t think it will happen, but considering right now Biggio is probably only one who gets in next year after roiders get taken out, would be a cool thing to do.
Schilling and Piazza will get in eventually, but not first ballot.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:27 PM
Jack Morris should be in.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:27 PM
Peter Gammons must have changed his mind. Maybe he realizes that wins are not enough to override a 3.90 ERA and 0 Cy Young awards. If Jim Kaat and Tommy John can’t get in, why should Morris?
January 9th, 2012 at 3:27 PM
i agree, meant to add/imply “that would be assuming they had a brain to begin with”
the “moralists” are in the same class as the voters who refuse to cast a vote based on their belief no one is a 1st ballot HOFer
January 9th, 2012 at 3:27 PM
Cool. Someone remind me to not bother opening tomorrow’s sports section. All it’s going to be is whining that Morris didn’t get elected.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:27 PM
the guy standing behind the two mic’s over Barry’s shoulder deserves an instant induction into the mustache hall of fame.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:27 PM
Ron Karkovice’s movie star good looks was the glue that held those teams together
January 9th, 2012 at 3:28 PM
2014 is stacked with Thomas, Maddux, Mussina, Jim Edmonds, Jeff Kent and Glavine.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:28 PM
If Piazza and Pudge get in. So should Bonds and Clemens.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:29 PM
Being a whiner does not disqualify you from a Hall of Fame.
Blyleven >>>>>>> Morris >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ron Guidry
January 9th, 2012 at 3:30 PM
That was so 2011.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:30 PM
yes.
/actually, I don’t know, but I felt bad for you because everyone was ignoring your question
January 9th, 2012 at 3:31 PM
Jack Morris did a great job of hanging around a long time and picking up wins on great teams. Dave Stieb’s prime > Jack Morris’s prime. Too bad Stieb broke down the way he did or he would have been in for sure.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:31 PM
Is Manny still coming back this year?
January 9th, 2012 at 3:32 PM
Based on who is currently in the Hall, I think I’d agree.
Based on what I believe the Hall should be, absolutely not.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:32 PM
About time Larkin got in.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:32 PM
http://25yearsofbaseball.com/cards/1987/topps/491_ron_karkovice.jpg
That is raw sexuality right there folks.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:33 PM
You can’t mention Ron and not put him Hawk Harrelson title in front.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:34 PM
Whoa, slow down there, eh? Isn’t the whole argument for Morris the fact that he was dominating in his prime. But his prime was only like 2 seasons and the ’91 WS?
January 9th, 2012 at 3:34 PM
You ever see the Baseball Card page on JoeSportsFan.com?
January 9th, 2012 at 3:35 PM
He was not dominating in his prime. He won a huge game in the playoffs, though.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:36 PM
You ever see the Baseball Card page on JoeSportsFan.com?
http://www.joesportsfan.com/cards.php
Actually, i have not — but thank you. I have been laughing at my desk for the last 2 minutes. Craig Kusick is my favorite.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:36 PM
Jack Morris should be in
Based on who is currently in the Hall, I think I’d agree.
Based on what I believe the Hall should be, absolutely not.
I don’t think he should be in no matter which way you want to look at it.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:37 PM
Trammell and Whitaker should both be in.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:38 PM
Agreed. As a Tigers fan, I’ll always have love Morris. But he’s not a HOFer.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:38 PM
Kark was the athlete who, when I was a kid, made me realize that not all pro athletes were good at what they did.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:38 PM
Jeff Bagwell and his explosive goatee have been shunned for now (56%)
This was sadly expected.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:38 PM
I can’t look at that at work because I’ll get strange looks from everyone for laughing out loud for an hour straight.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:39 PM
Kark was the athlete who, when I was a kid, made me realize that not all pro athletes were good at what they did.
I don’t think I had that realization until I saw Rich Garces pitch in a game.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:39 PM
Brad Radke got two votes, I demand those writers step forward and explain themselves
January 9th, 2012 at 3:39 PM
3.91 career ERA would be the highest in the HoF. Let’s stop this whole Jack Morris charade, he does not deserve to be in the HoF.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:39 PM
Stieb’s prime lasted about two minutes. But if that’s what we’re going for, Dwight Gooden’s prime > Jack Morris’ prime > Dave Stieb’s prime
January 9th, 2012 at 3:40 PM
Piazza should be first ballot, right? Was he ever linked to anything?
January 9th, 2012 at 3:40 PM
I owe you a Frosty from Wendy’s Mr. Ryan.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:40 PM
There a way to find out who those two voters are?
January 9th, 2012 at 3:40 PM
Piazza should be first ballot, right? Was he ever linked to anything?
Space docking.
Oh, you meant drugs.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:41 PM
Was he ever linked to anything?
I remember someone saying he had backne. So he had that going for him.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:41 PM
Just banging dudes. Not sure that excludes you from HOF consideration though…
January 9th, 2012 at 3:41 PM
Harold Baines.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:41 PM
OHHHH, a 3.91 ERA!!! Someone has to have the highest ERA in the Hall of Fame.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:41 PM
Bonds should be in, but won’t. The writers will want to make their “statement” and keep him out of the first ballot list.
I wouldn’t vote for him. So put me down as “foolhardy moralist” then…
January 9th, 2012 at 3:42 PM
He was linked to being a homo. But he should be a first ballot HOFer.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:42 PM
Happy for Larkin, he was a helluva player.
Saw Raines play in the minors and the majors. He was a force offensively. Hope he gets in soon.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:42 PM
Besides a mullet?
January 9th, 2012 at 3:42 PM
Ron Karkovice’s movie star good looks was the glue that held those teams together
I guffawed.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:43 PM
I will never be able to fathom how Tebow wasn’t inducted.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:43 PM
Randy Brown, Jud Buechler, Mike Peluso, Cam Russell, 75% of the Cubs roster from 1991-1998 and every QB to play for the Bears not named Erik Kramer from 1990-2006 made me realize not all pro athletes were good at what they did.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:43 PM
OHHHH, a 3.91 ERA!!! Someone has to have the highest ERA in the Hall of Fame.
That doesn’t mean it should be that high of an ERA. But that’s a shitty way of measuring his worth.
Morris supporters always asserted he was better than Blyleven, despite the fact that Blyeleven pitched more innings, walked fewer and struck out more batters.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:44 PM
Mattingly
/boyhood idol
January 9th, 2012 at 3:44 PM
Yes, for a pitcher who wasn’t great except for two seasons and some playoff games. If you’re going to be a HoFer, you should at least be a top 5 pitcher/batter over a 5-7 years span.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:45 PM
Mattingly
/boyhood idol
Did you shave your sideburns like him?
January 9th, 2012 at 3:45 PM
This. He also had a 21 win season the following year even though he was a very average pitcher. Amazing what a batting order that scores a ton of runs and a pretty good defence can do for a pitcher’s win stats.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:45 PM
They got caught up in the 2006 season while pitching with a bad shoulder.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:45 PM
I grew them like Dylan McKay
January 9th, 2012 at 3:45 PM
Why’s Cal Ripken and Ryne Sandberg in then?
January 9th, 2012 at 3:46 PM
Bill Mueller got 4 fucking votes!
January 9th, 2012 at 3:46 PM
and why not Mattingly? 1984-1989, awesome.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:46 PM
no, but he was still a whiny little bitch.
based on Blyleven making it in, Morris should make it in, but neither should be in.
/the summary of the HOF argument for any player.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:46 PM
sideburns
January 9th, 2012 at 3:47 PM
Or be among the best in the position you played. Hence my strong support for Piazza.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:47 PM
Tie between Danny Schayes and Keith Moreland.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:48 PM
Bill Mueller got 4 fucking votes!
4 gritty, dirt covered votes I bet.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:48 PM
if I could find a Joe Kleine Bulls era jersey, I would send it your way.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:48 PM
Guess that leaves the door open for Kevin Millar to get 2% of the vote some year.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:48 PM
Sandy Alomar Jr. > Mike Piazza > Einar Diaz
January 9th, 2012 at 3:48 PM
You can blame Pedro Gomez for one of those.
/go ahead and waste your vote!
January 9th, 2012 at 3:49 PM
What do Pete Harnisch, Dave Wickersham, Ewell Blackwell, and Earl Wilson have in common? They’re the four pitchers ranked immediately in front of Jack Morris in terms of career WHIP. Oh, and none of them are in the Hall of Fame.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:49 PM
Wasn’t Piazza the guy that had the back full of acne and writers always brought that up all hush hush without ever mentioning his name?
January 9th, 2012 at 3:51 PM
Pete Harnisch
Ah yes, Pete Harnisch. He quit dipping when he was on the Mets and then suffered from clinical depression as a result.
/leaves modifier dangling
//because the Mets could equally be culpable.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:52 PM
One symptom does not an illness make.
I’ve never taken steriods, and before taking Accutane last year, I had occasional backne as well. It does happen.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:52 PM
Piazza was dirty.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:53 PM
I believe that can be traced back to having sweat from a mans face drip on his back during anal intercourse.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:54 PM
Yes, 1980-1991 is roughly two minutes. There were two bad seasons in there but he was consistently excellent to very good outside of those years. Plus, seven 1-hitters and a no hitter suggest he was pretty dominant when he was on his game.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:54 PM
I’ve never taken steriods, and before taking Accutane last year, I had occasional backne as well. It does happen.
From what I remember this wasn’t 10-15 odd zits on the guys back. It was more like an entire back that looked like bubble wrap.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:55 PM
I could see that happening.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:55 PM
Those Denver Bears teams were pretty righteous. Andre Dawson, Raines, man did the Expos have a pipeline for a few years.
Somewhere I still have Raines’ rookie year card with all of his minor league stats on the back.
January 9th, 2012 at 3:57 PM
I’ve never taken steriods, and before taking Accutane last year, I had occasional backne as well. It does happen.
Same. I took Accutane/Claravis in 2010. The best part about it was that I had already met my prescription deductible for the year (thank you appendicitis), and so I didn’t have to pay a dime for any of it.
January 9th, 2012 at 4:02 PM
Legend.
January 9th, 2012 at 4:04 PM
/vomits
January 9th, 2012 at 4:06 PM
Blyleven was a .500 pitcher who hung around long enough to gather some stats. People talk about Morris happening to be on good teams contributing to his record, but you take a look at Blyleven’s records on good teams, like the 79 Pirates, and it was still mediocre.
January 9th, 2012 at 4:09 PM
You win, Pete Harnisch > Jack Morris
January 9th, 2012 at 4:10 PM
i remember one dude at the gym i used to work out at who’d wear those gay ass bodybuilder, stringy tank tops who had a ton of really bad backne…not confirmed, but he was big and freaky enough looking that it made you assume roids were a factor. really fucking gross.
January 9th, 2012 at 4:13 PM
You can call me a homer if you want, but I fully believe Sammy Sosa should be elected to the Hall of Fame. 100% a steroid user and I even hated him during his final couple seasons as a Cub. Still, he was a HoF calibre player. I’d vote him in.
He was marginal in the field and swung a juiced and corked bat. Homer you is.
January 9th, 2012 at 4:13 PM
Blyleven was a .500 pitcher who hung around long enough to gather some stats. People talk about Morris happening to be on good teams contributing to his record, but you take a look at Blyleven’s records on good teams, like the 79 Pirates, and it was still mediocre.
This is a fool’s errand by me, but a pitcher’s W-L record is almost never, by itself, indicative of his worth or value.
January 9th, 2012 at 4:14 PM
2-0 in the playoffs that year. 19 innings, 3 runs, 13 strikeouts.
January 9th, 2012 at 4:14 PM
always possible, without the use of steroids, the guy was too bulky even to use a back scrubber to clean his back when he showered.
January 9th, 2012 at 4:15 PM
“Do you mind if I work in on the bench with ya brah?”
“You know what I think I am pretty much done here. Its all yours.”
January 9th, 2012 at 4:26 PM
If you feel pitchers win by luck, then I see that point of view. But if you’re like me and feel a great pitcher elevates a team, the way I remember seeing a Jack Morris elevate the Tigers from the moment he hit Detroit or Dwight Gooden elevate the Mets at the time he arrived in 84 or Pedro elevate the Red Sox everytime he pitched, Fernando Valezuela in 81, Ron Guidry in 78, Clemens with the Red Sox, Dave Stewart with the A’s, then we’re going to see it a little differently. Those type of pitchers happen to be lucky everywhere they go.
January 9th, 2012 at 4:30 PM
As good as Morris was for the Twins, he was just as awful for the Blue Jays the next year. Tried to single handedly give that series away.
January 9th, 2012 at 4:37 PM
If you feel pitchers win by luck, then I see that point of view. But if you’re like me and feel a great pitcher elevates a team, the way I remember seeing a Jack Morris elevate the Tigers from the moment he hit Detroit or Dwight Gooden elevate the Mets at the time he arrived in 84 or Pedro elevate the Red Sox everytime he pitched, Fernando Valezuela in 81, Ron Guidry in 78, Clemens with the Red Sox, Dave Stewart with the A’s, then we’re going to see it a little differently. Those type of pitchers happen to be lucky everywhere they go.
I won’t go round and round with you on this because I know ultimately we disagree and you come by your point of view honestly as I come by mine honestly. And I also believe that two people can disagree but still converse. Having said that, a pitcher’s record does not account for everything that happens in a game outside of his control; including most of his own team’s offense, and most of the defense behind him. Could any pitcher on the Red Sox help it when Manny was making absurd decisions in the outfield? The Astros had a guy named Jeriome Robertson lead them in wins one year. It wasn’t because he had great stuff, he average to slightly above average breaking balls, it was because he got the highest run support of any other pitcher on the team. This is also the same reason that Roger Clemens was 13-8 for the Astros in 2005 but had a sub 2.00 ERA (in fact he had the lowest in a season since Bob Gibson in 1968): the Astros had no offense to speak of that year (which is part of the reason they got swept by the White Sox in the Series).
If you want to assert that there is some sort of emotional or comradely connection between players that makes them play better, well I won’t deny that. Mostly because I can’t. There is no proof either way of its existence or lack of existence. But there a ton of other ways we can quantify someone’s value that are easily proven and I’d rather rely on those.
January 9th, 2012 at 4:42 PM
Honestly, after learning Morris pitched an astounding 293.2 innings in 1983 to go along with 20 complete games, I’m confused as to why he wasn’t inducted following that season.
And in ’85 Blyleven threw 293.2 and 24 CG’s.
January 9th, 2012 at 4:43 PM
blyleven, morris…can’t we all just get along and love farts?
January 9th, 2012 at 4:44 PM
I remember that dude looking like Sandy Koufax against the Cards one game.
January 9th, 2012 at 4:45 PM
I remember that dude looking like Sandy Koufax against the Cards one game.
It was a mirage I’m afraid. We dumped him the very next year in a trade, I think, to Cleveland.
January 9th, 2012 at 4:53 PM
Pedro, Fernando, and Clemens were great pitchers because they did things on the mound that made it very difficult for the other team to score runs. They didn’t piss magic win sauce that the rest of the team drank up to hit better.
Morris was a good pitcher who happened to throw a legendary game in the world series. But his W/L record is more of a product of run support. If it wasn’t, he would have, you know, better pitching stats.
January 9th, 2012 at 4:59 PM
I remember this pitcher named Anthony Young who had a ridiculous losing or winless streak. He didn’t have terrible stuff. He didn’t have an extraordinary high ERA, but as Dwight Gooden said about him, some people pitch well enough to lose. He would always have a bad inning or make a pitch at the wrong time that would cause him to lose the game. Of course this is an extreme example of my opinion that although a pitcher cannot control everything within a game, the great ones are great because they control the things they can at a high level, maintain the mental toughness to fight through those things that go wrong around them, thus inspiring confidence in the rest of their team.
January 9th, 2012 at 5:03 PM
so your assertion is that the teams pissed magic win sauce for Morris. They happened to do that often enough for him to be the winningest pitcher of the 80′s. That’s a lot of piss.
January 9th, 2012 at 5:06 PM
They scored a lot of runs for him. So yeah, they sort of did piss magic win sauce for Morris. He was able to pitch worse (4.04 earned runs allowed per nine innings pitched in 1992) and still win 21 games.
January 9th, 2012 at 5:10 PM
I remember this pitcher named Anthony Young who had a ridiculous losing or winless streak. He didn’t have terrible stuff. He didn’t have an extraordinary high ERA, but as Dwight Gooden said about him, some people pitch well enough to lose. He would always have a bad inning or make a pitch at the wrong time that would cause him to lose the game. Of course this is an extreme example of my opinion that although a pitcher cannot control everything within a game, the great ones are great because they control the things they can at a high level, maintain the mental toughness to fight through those things that go wrong around them, thus inspiring confidence in the rest of their team.
I agree with about 95% of that. The last part I feel is an unsupported jump in logic, but as I said, we’ll just agree to disagree there.
January 9th, 2012 at 5:14 PM
That dude was fierce. Great pitcher.
That’s incredible.
January 9th, 2012 at 5:15 PM
Ok then. And this was done by the Tigers as well. He was able to get this magic piss sauce for the entire 80′s?
January 9th, 2012 at 5:17 PM
You don’t agree that my example was extreme? I appreciate that.
January 9th, 2012 at 5:20 PM
There are a bunch of guys who have led MLB in wins for arbitrary 10 year periods. Why does that matter at all? Andy Pettite, for one.
January 9th, 2012 at 5:22 PM
Frank Viola, for another.
January 9th, 2012 at 5:22 PM
Like those 60 shutouts. Whatta compiler.
January 9th, 2012 at 5:24 PM
And Darrell, you know I love this particular go-round, because none of us are ever going to be wrong.
January 9th, 2012 at 5:25 PM
You don’t agree that my example was extreme? I appreciate that.
I don’t actually think it was that extreme. The difference between a great pitcher and a good pitcher is small; probably only a handful of pitches in a game. The difference between a good pitcher and an average or below average pitcher is about the same. The baseball season is so long that a small amount of occurrences in a week is the difference between a journeyman and someone getting a $100 million contract (I’m referring here of course to Crash Davis’ pool hall speech in Bull Durham).
My overarching point is that how ‘lucky’ a player is can largely be quantified in the numbers that he records. It’s not like basketball or hockey or to a lesser extent football, where statistics can miss out on large contributions. Baseball is peculiar in that virtually every play has dozens of different things happening and virtually all of them can be recorded and measured to show how good each player is at those things.
January 9th, 2012 at 5:26 PM
Jack Morris was a very good pitcher. A borderline Hall of Famer. There are many intelligent arguments for his induction. His magical ability to will his team to win is not one of them.
Pitcher W/L is a terrible, inaccurate, and lazy way to judge a pitcher’s performance. It doesn’t tell you anything other than that he pitched enough innings that day to qualify for a win.
January 9th, 2012 at 5:28 PM
Best pitcher of the 1940s, by wins: Hal Newhouser.
While using the intertubes, noticed that the third most wins in the ’80s, after Morris and Stieb, belonged to Bob Welch. Huh. Makes sense, but I never would have remembered that.
January 9th, 2012 at 5:30 PM
While using the intertubes, noticed that the third most wins in the ’80s, after Morris and Stieb, belonged to Bob Welch. Huh. Makes sense, but I never would have remembered that.
Sincerely doubt Bob Welch even remembers that.
January 9th, 2012 at 5:33 PM
You may want to take a look at a little event which took place between 1941 and 45 and see how it affected the sports landscape in general. After that, you can put an asterisk next to Newhouser’s name.
January 9th, 2012 at 5:43 PM
Newhouser, fwiw, didn’t really come on until ’44 (thanks ‘webs!). He racked up his totals in the second half of the decade.
January 9th, 2012 at 5:50 PM
Being able to “will a team to win” would probably be more accurately described as being an Ace, and being one doesn’t take some magical ability. Being able to recognize one will cause you to have to raise your head up from the formula book and watch a game and not compare Jack Morris to Pete Harnisch.
January 9th, 2012 at 5:54 PM
I just don’t get it. Baseball has *always* been about stats. Always. From the red whiskey and handlebar ‘stache beginnings. We just have more exact ones these days. Why is that a problem?
January 9th, 2012 at 5:58 PM
I forgot that wins weren’t stats. Jeez, if only I left my mom’s basement once in a while.
January 9th, 2012 at 6:07 PM
Darrell is in the zone.
January 9th, 2012 at 6:09 PM
Being able to recognize one will cause you to have to raise your head up from the formula book and watch a game and not compare Jack Morris to Pete Harnisch.
On it’s face, I might agree with you that it’s a ridiculous comparison, except when you take WHIP, which is very simply Walks + Hits divided by Innings Pitched (in other words there’s nothing complicated or overly algebraic about it), you can see that Harnisch allowed fewer base runners for the innings he pitched than Morris did for the innings he pitched. Is that not a valid way to measure a pitcher’s worth?
January 9th, 2012 at 6:32 PM
If its that simple, then Harnisch should have had results similar to Morris. I mean for a group of stats that are supposed to be exact to relegate the difference in results between pitchers to luck or magic piss juice diminishes the value of those stats. Its lazy.
January 9th, 2012 at 6:40 PM
If its that simple, then Harnisch should have had results similar to Morris
How exactly do you figure that? WHIP should be as uncontroversial as ERA. And its simplicity is why you see it used more and more on pitcher stat lines on even local broadcasts.
I mean for a group of stats that are supposed to be exact to relegate the difference in results between pitchers to luck or magic piss juice diminishes the value of those stats. Its lazy.
To be clear, I wasn’t the one who made the ‘magic piss juice’ comment. I’ve learned to try to be respectful when making points (though I still let my ego get the better of me sometimes).
Beyond that though, I can’t agree or disagree because I’m not sure what point you’re making. WHIP shows, without a shadow of a doubt because there was an official scorer at every single game that both Morris and Harnisch pitched at in the Majors, that Harnisch allowed fewer base runners through walks and hits allowed over the course of the innings he pitched than Morris did. What conclusions you wish to draw from that are entirely up to you, but that seems to me to be an easy and open way to qualitatively measure them against each other. Isn’t it, after all, the pitcher’s job to keep people from getting on base?
January 9th, 2012 at 6:41 PM
After reading this, I’m convinced Darrell is fucking with us b/c no one can believe the things he writes.
My favorite is that other major league players think to themselves, “Well shit Jack is pitching today…time to actually hit the ball better. Tomorrow when Bert picthes, I could give a fuck.”
January 9th, 2012 at 6:42 PM
It has been about stats in context not just stats in a vacum. It has actually been less about stats historically than it is currently. To me its a sham just to keep fans of small market and losing teams enamored with the cheaper player on the horizon instead of the stud they weren’t able to sign or re-sign.
January 9th, 2012 at 6:44 PM
Darrell I think I see now the point you’re trying to make vis a vis the ‘similar results’ comment.
The answer is no, not necessarily. The reason is that a pitcher can be really good at keeping runners off base, but if he plays for a team with a shitty offense (remember my Roger Clemens in 2005 example earlier?) then he has a smaller margin for error than a pitcher who plays for a team with a really good offense.
January 9th, 2012 at 6:51 PM
I know you didn’t make the comment. Its just on this subject I’m usually arguing against a few people simultaneously and I’m attempting to condense my responses.
January 9th, 2012 at 6:55 PM
Jack was lucky and Bert was unlucky.
January 9th, 2012 at 6:58 PM
Since this argument is still going on, I’ll throw this comparison out there. That two minute prime that Stieb had was pretty impressive.
January 9th, 2012 at 7:03 PM
EXACTLY!!!!!!
Pitcher wins lack context. Pitcher Rich McShithead gave up 19 runs in 5 innings. Luckily, LF Homer Awesomeness plays for the same team and hit 7 grand slams that same day. McShithead’s team won 29-23.
McShithead gets the win.
January 9th, 2012 at 7:09 PM
Not very subtle, but jrd.x knows of what he speaks.
January 9th, 2012 at 7:10 PM
But did Rich McShithead piss magic?
January 9th, 2012 at 7:13 PM
Plus, the only reason Awesomeness hit those grand slams is b/c Shithead inspired confidence in him.
January 9th, 2012 at 7:14 PM
Thats one win, not 20. What are the chances of McShithead winning 20 games by giving up 19 runs a game? What are the chances of him winning another 1? What are the chances that he would give up 19 runs in another game? You shouldn’t use an anomaly to prove your point.
January 9th, 2012 at 7:42 PM
If his team averages 5 or 6 runs a game and on average he gives up slightly more than 4, pretty good.
But you’re missing the point. Instead of trying to figure out if those wins were good wins or bad wins, why don’t we look at the 150,000 better stats available to measure pitcher performance?