Tracy Ringolsby Lazily Checks Off the Boxes Required to Argue Jack Morris Should Be in the Hall of Fame

Tracy Ringolsby, who has the absolute best picture above his columns for MLB.com, thinks Jack Morris should be in the Hall of Fame. First, let me remind you that Ringolsby's picture is of him staring into the distance, probably angrily at a bird that he just can't wait to shoot out of the sky, with a black cowboy hat on. Now THAT is the kind of picture I like to see a baseball writer use above the heading to his column. It says, "I'm manly, my cowboy hat fits perfectly, and no, I don't have to look directly into the camera."

I'm tired of talking about Jack Morris and the Hall of Fame and I am sure you are tired of hearing about Jack Morris and the Hall of Fame. What I find to be interesting about this column advocating for Morris to be in the Hall of Fame is there is a list of criteria every writer who advocates Morris's entry into the Hall of Fame must check off for it to be approved by the Jack Morris Talking Points for the Baseball Hall of Fame Committee that probably sends an email out everyday reminding Hall of Fame voters to vote for Morris. The three major talking points all pro-Jack Morris columns must have, as set out by the Jack Morris Talking Points for the Baseball Hall of Fame Committee, are as follows:

1. He completed a lot of games. Repeat this at least three times for maximum effect.

2. Game 7 of the 1991 World Series. It happened. Include a quote from one of Morris's managers showing how much he wanted the ball in important games.

3. He was the best pitcher of his era because he won a lot of games.

Ringolsby seems to give us the all the exact same information every other pro-Morris writer has given us and he includes each of these talking points in making his case. 

Jack Morris has come closer to being elected to the Hall of Fame than anybody who was ever denied admittance, but in this, his 15th and final year on the Baseball Writers' Association of America ballot, Morris still faces long odds.

He's been a workhorse in staying on the Hall of Fame ballot. He's pitching a complete game when it comes to being on the Hall of Fame ballot. Let him in the Hall of Fame now!

Morris could well be victim of the new reliance on statistical analysis.

Jack Morris is such a martyr. He has to pay for the sins of those who rely on statistical analysis to evaluate a player's statistics which determine whether that player should enter the Hall of Fame or not. Crazy how that works that the stats crowd uses statistics to determine whether a baseball player has good enough statistics to be inducted into the Hall of Fame.

In the world of baseball stats, four does not always equal four. Evaluations need to be based on eras, and for his era, Morris was the most dominant pitcher in the game.

Why do statistics need to be based on eras? I give Ringolsby credit, he didn't follow the Jack Morris Talking Points for the Baseball of Hall of Fame Committee Talking Points all the way and included his own bullshit reasoning to support Morris's candidacy. Shouldn't the evaluation of a pitcher for the baseball Hall of Fame be based on how he compares to other dominant pitchers in the Hall of Fame? It's not the baseball Hall of Fame Based on Era, but a cumulative collection of the best baseball players in history. "History" being the key word there. Jack Morris has to be one of the best pitchers in MLB history to be inducted into the Hall of Fame, not the best pitcher of an era and this would qualify him for the baseball Hall of Fame.

It's silly in my opinion to base evaluations on a pitcher's era. It's especially silly when the opinion that the evaluation of a pitcher should be based on his era is being used solely to advocate Morris being inducted into the Hall of Fame as one of the most dominant pitchers in the game. Morris being the most dominant pitcher of his era is also pretty arguable.

There are 12 starting pitchers in the Hall of Fame who performed during the DH era. None of the 12 spent his entire career in the AL.

I understand Morris's ERA may have been inflated a bit by pitching his entire career in the AL, but he still has a much higher ERA than every other pitcher who pitched during the DH era in the American League and is currently in the Hall of Fame. Here is a list of pitchers who are in the Hall of Fame who pitched during the DH era and how long they spent in the American League. Morris pitched 18 years in the majors, all in the American League, but I don't need to find pitchers who pitched 18 years in the American League to prove my point that Morris's ERA is still higher than a Hall of Fame-worthy pitcher during the DH era should be. A sample size of 4-5 years in the American League seems sufficient for me.

Nolan Ryan- 3.17 ERA (13 years)

Bert Blyleven- 3.23 (19 years...lower ERA than Morris by half a point and he pitched longer than Morris in the AL)

Gaylord Perry- 3.24 (9 years)

Goose Gossage- 3.12 (16 years)

Dennis Eckersley- 3.47 (20 years)

Don Sutton- 3.98 (6 years...not to make excuses, but Sutton pitched in the AL when he was in his last 30's and 40's. You know, the same time in his career Morris was putting up ERA's of 4.04, 6.19, and 5.60)

Phil Neikro- 4.23 (4 years...again, he pitched in the AL from the age of 45-48, so his ERA is a bit misleading in terms of his overall ability)

Fergie Jenkins- 3.54 (8 years)

Jack Morris has a higher ERA in the AL than all of these pitchers. The pitchers that had a higher ERA than Morris pitched solely in the American League at the very tail end of their career. So I can buy that Morris's ERA was elevated slightly by pitching in the American League, but other Hall of Fame pitchers pitched in the American League and had a much lower ERA than Jack Morris did. The bottom line is that Morris wasn't an elite pitcher.

Only two of them even faced a DH in more than half of their big league games: Bert Blyleven pitched 483 of his 692 games in the AL after the addition of the DH. Jim Palmer made all 558 of his appearances with the Baltimore Orioles, but only 354 of them came after the addition of the DH.

It's not about whether a pitcher pitched the majority of his career in the AL or not, but it is about whether that pitcher pitched long enough in the AL to get a large enough sample size of games pitched to come to a conclusion. I would think five years of pitching in the AL is a large enough sample size to look at a pitcher's ERA in the AL and come to a conclusion. Also, Jim Palmer's ERA in the AL was 2.86, a full run lower than Morris's ERA. I feel like I needed to add this. ERA isn't the end-all be-all, but if Ringolsby wants to argue on the matter of ERA then Morris still doesn't look great.

The 10 other starters who faced the DH in their careers are Don Sutton (174 of 774 appearances against lineups with the DH), Tom Seaver (97 of 656 appearances), Nolan Ryan (381 of 807 appearances), Gaylord Perry (277 of 777 appearances), Phil Niekro (124 of 740 appearances), Juan Marichal (11 of 471 appearances), Ferguson Jenkins (255 of 664 appearances), Catfish Hunter (214 of 500 appearances) and Steve Carlton (46 of 741 appearances).

Rollie Fingers (inducted in 1992), Dennis Eckersley, (2004), Bruce Sutter ('06) and Goose Gossage ('08) were enshrined for their work as relievers rather than starters.

Nearly all of these pitchers had a lower ERA in the American League than Jack Morris. Whether Fingers, Eckersley, Sutter, and Gossage were relievers or not is somewhat irrelevant. They pitched to the DH as well, even if it was on a short-term basis. If they gave up two runs in the 8th or 9th inning it still affected their ERA.

Morris' 254 wins tie him with Red Faber for 43rd on the all-time list. There are 13 pitchers ahead of Morris who are not enshrined.

Of them, Greg Maddux, Tom Glavine and Mike Mussina are on the ballot for the first time this year. Randy Johnson, Jamie Moyer and Andy Pettitte aren't eligible yet. Tony Mullane (1881-94), Bobby Mathews (1871-87), Jim McCormick (1878-87) and Gus Weyhing (1887-1901) were products of the 1800s.

Oh now Ringolsby isn't comparing pitchers to pitchers from their generation anymore. Mullane, Mathews, McCormick, and Weyhing were products of the 1800's, but if they compare favorably to other pitchers from the 1800's then using Ringolsby's "Hey, let's compare a pitcher's candidacy for the Hall of Fame only using other pitchers from his era as a measurement so we can get Jack Morris into the Hall of Fame" method these four pitchers should have good cases to be in the Hall of Fame, right?

Roger Clemens was eligible for the first time a year ago, but he was one of the targets of the voters who protested PED usage.

Yeah, but compared to pitchers from his era, the Steroid Era, he was one of the best pitchers who used PED's. So if we are comparing Roger Clemens to his era of cheating PED users, Clemens was one of the best pitchers. Let him in the Hall of Fame using Tracy Ringolsby "Era Theory" that was specifically created to get Jack Morris into the Hall of Fame. 

Morris was the winningest pitcher of his era.

I'm the fastest person in my household. This doesn't make me fast enough to run the 100 meter dash in the Olympics.

From his debut until 1994, Morris' final season, he won 254 games. Dennis Martinez, who also pitched in each of those seasons, is a distant second for that 18-season stretch, with 218 wins, followed by Bob Welch (211), Ryan (202) and Frank Tanana (189).

This is part of the reason advanced metrics were created, to deal with a writer who says Jack Morris is the best pitcher of his era (which for some reason Morris's era only encapsulates when he was active, when the DH era Morris pitched in didn't start when Morris entered the league and stop when Morris left the league) and use wins as the sole example of why. Great, Morris had a lot of wins during an era when there weren't a ton of great pitchers. This doesn't make him a Hall of Famer.

Also, Ringolsby can now proudly check off point #3 in his Jack Morris Talking Points. He's mentioned Morris had a lot of wins during his era.

Morris appeared in seven postseason series and won three World Series: in 1984 with Detroit, '91 with Minnesota and '92 with Toronto.

Check off point #2 in his Jack Morris Talking Points. Let's talk about the World Series victories that Jack Morris participated in and then heavily weigh these into whether Morris should be in the Hall of Fame or not.

Morris started Game 1 in six of those seven playoff series, earning the selection from three managers: Sparky Anderson in Detroit, Tom Kelly in Minnesota and Cito Gaston in Toronto.

Starting Game 1 of the World Series multiple times isn't a reason to put a pitcher in the Hall of Fame. Whether a pitcher starts Game 1 of the World Series isn't the sole determination of whether that pitcher is the best pitcher on his respective team or even that the pitcher is one of the best pitchers in the game. The Game 1 starter for a team can be based on how much rest the other starting pitchers on the roster have, whether the game is being played at home or on the road (many times a manager will set up a younger pitcher to pitch at home in the World Series), and the quality of the other starting pitchers on the staff. There are other factors too. Basically, Jack Morris isn't necessarily a Hall of Famer simply because he started Game 1 of the World Series. It could be another pitcher on the staff would have had to work on short rest or Morris just happened to be the best pitcher on the staff, which doesn't mean Morris is a Hall of Fame pitcher.

The one time Morris missed a Game 1 start was with Detroit against Minnesota in the 1987 AL Championship Series. But Morris started for the Tigers in Game 161 of the regular season that year -- and tossed a complete game -- earning an extra day of rest before appearing in the postseason.

Exactly. Morris couldn't pitch in Game 1 because he needed rest and this could very well work the other way where Morris did pitch Game 1 because another pitcher on the staff needed rest. Also, how well Morris pitched in those seven career playoff series is much more important than the fact he pitched Game 1 of the series. Morris wasn't great in three of the postseason series he pitched in, was average in one series, and was great in three other series. His postseason record looks a lot like his career record. An ERA just below 4.00, he pitched a lot of innings, and he won more games than he lost. On a macro-level, he was great sometimes and not great other times.

Morris was 4-2 with a 2.96 ERA in seven career World Series starts, working three complete games, including a 1-0, 10-inning Game 7 win for Minnesota against Atlanta in 1991.

Ringolsby checks off point #2 with a black magic marker yet again for emphasis.

Morris' career ERA was 3.90. The highest ERA of a Hall of Fame pitcher is Red Ruffing's 3.80.

ERA isn't everything, but even if you don't care about ERA Morris's candidacy just doesn't hold up. Joe Sheehan a decade later still wrote it best about why Morris isn't a Hall of Famer.

Morris was a five-time All-Star selection,

Irrelevant. All-Star selections are the epitome of popularity contests based on perception of that player's talent.

and he finished in the top 10 in the AL Cy Young Award voting seven times.

How many times did Morris win the Cy Young? Zero.
How many times did Morris finish second in the Cy Young voting? Zero.

Granted, I'm not a huge fan of using postseason awards to judge whether a player should be in the Hall of Fame or not. Still, the Cy Young has traditionally (especially during the era Morris played in) been given to pitchers who won the most games and had the best traditional statistics. Many of these same statistics are being used to trumpet Jack Morris to be inducted into the baseball Hall of Fame.

So I find it incredibly interesting the so-called "best pitcher of his era" and a guy who had the most wins of his era wasn't voted as even the second-best pitcher in a given year by the Cy Young award voters. Shouldn't this tell you something? An award which traditionally been given to the pitcher that has the best statistics (the same statistics that are being used to put Jack Morris into the Hall of Fame) was never given to Jack Morris in an individual year. Fine, cumulatively Jack Morris put up some good numbers, but in a given year he was never considered the most second-most dominant pitcher in the American League, yet I am supposed to believe he is one of the most dominant and best pitchers in baseball history? Again, I don't like using the Cy Young award to say Morris shouldn't be in the Hall of Fame, but the criteria that determines who wins the Cy Young (wins, complete games, played on a winning team) are the exact same criteria to support Morris's Hall of Fame candidacy...and Morris never even came in second in the Cy Young voting. I think it tells me something.

Morris was the '91 World Series Most Valuable Player and the 1981 The Sporting News Pitcher of the Year.

Okay. This is very impressive. This doesn't make him a Hall of Famer.

Morris was the '91 World Series Most Valuable Player and the 1981 The Sporting News Pitcher of the Year.

Now Ringolsby checks off point #1 on his Jack Morris Talking Points. Complete games. Jack Morris is the last dinosaur of the complete game era. I've heard it all before.

which is more than Maddux (109) and Glavine (56) combined. Among the eight starting pitchers on this year's ballot, Clemens is second with 118 complete games, followed by Maddux (109), Curt Schilling (83), Mussina (57), Glavine (56), Kenny Rogers (36) and Hideo Nomo (16).

Well then let's induct Morris into the baseball Complete Game Hall of Fame for Pitchers Who Won an Important Postseason Game. He's a first ballot Hall of Famer there.

At this point, any article on Jack Morris and the Hall of Fame is just a lazy recitation of the three Jack Morris Talking Points.