tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-102327997051254703.post1695149969241161548..comments2023-10-31T06:31:41.395-04:00Comments on Bottom of the Barrel: Look! It's Jon Heyman's Hall of Fame BallotBengoodfellahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09401971573776672570noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-102327997051254703.post-44596239863176452472012-02-20T07:52:09.892-05:002012-02-20T07:52:09.892-05:00Justin, I agree. What is interesting is Chris Berm...Justin, I agree. What is interesting is Chris Berman gave him that name. It's like the one interesting and notable thing he did. I'm pretty sure that's where it came from. Still, players today just don't have such good nicknames I don't think. Dr. Strangeglove is probably better. <br /><br />Murray, it is always sad to hear about players who stayed healthy and were able to play everyday. Then this causes their career to be shorter than a player who didn't take as good care of himself. I like how Heyman essentially used Murphy's clean living as a negative. Wouldn't that mean he was actually able to play longer than other players? <br /><br />Apparently Don Mattingly underwent some controversial treatment that transformed his body into a power hitter. I am getting a Marvel Comics vibe from this. <br /><br />Anon, I do think he has made his decision before he writes the column. He uses evidence one way or another to further prove the way he wants to vote. Bagwell should be in if you aren't ignoring him b/c of steroid suspicions. I think indifference is almost as bad as pretending to care about statistics, but at least it isn't as disingenuous. We know where Murray Chass stands. I like how Heyman was like "Opening day starts may mean absolutely nothing, but I'm going to use it anyway as if it does." <br /><br />Again, Glavine had 4 career opening day starts. I didn't even look up another player b/c it was such a dumb stat. <br /><br />I didn't even notice the alphabetical order. That's even worse then b/c Bagwell is lumped in with Tony Womack. <br /><br />If Heyman votes for Pettitte, that is pure hypocrisy. He needs to look at Palmeiro/McGwire's career stats and figure out where they stand and then DQ them. He pretends to be unbiased against PED users, but then automatically DQ's these guys? How does that make sense? <br /><br />That's funny you looked at Brad Radke. I looked at him too, but didn't go in-depth like you did b/c I didn't want this to turn into a "bash Jack Morris" post even more than it already is!<br /><br />That's a great comparison and shows to me Morris was a really good pitcher who compiled those numbers after being in baseball for a few more years. I like comparisons like that. Showing a player who is not considered a HoF player and how much worse he looks compared to a guy who may be in the HoF one day. From what you showed me, there isn't enough to say Morris should be in. He beats Radke across the board, but his FIP/WHIP/ERA just aren't good enough for me. Morris just wasn't a dominant pitcher. <br /><br />Logic only plays a role if it helps support one of Heyman's candidates. Otherwise, it's out the window. <br /><br />Naliamegod, I wouldn't say those Mariners teams ever underachieved. I never thought they did. Still, you did bring up a good point. It's that '97 team he is talking about, but that was just one year. Also, I don't know how being the fourth best player on a team that didn't win the World Series is relevant. This is basically a random stat thrown in there to discount Edgar's candidacy, just like "opening day starts" was used to support Morris' candidacy.Bengoodfellahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09401971573776672570noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-102327997051254703.post-32801782586467993862012-02-19T21:08:09.033-05:002012-02-19T21:08:09.033-05:00I always hate it when sportswriters talk about the...I always hate it when sportswriters talk about the 90s Mariner teams and talk about how underachieved with the "big three." Of course, if they actually bothered to look at the 90s Mariners teams, the big three were never really together except for one year (1997). Alex was a prospect in 95; Johnson was injured in 96; 97 they were together; and then in 98 Johnson was traded halfway through.Naliamegodnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-102327997051254703.post-66520126933629865032012-02-18T17:44:54.507-05:002012-02-18T17:44:54.507-05:00This is such a horrible HOF column. So many holes...This is such a horrible HOF column. So many holes and contradictions. Heyman is the worst. At least Murray Chass defiantly ignores the numbers and doesn't even pretend to care. Heyman pretends to care, perhaps because he doesn't want to sound like an outdated neanderthal like Chass or Joe Morgan. But Heyman clearly doesn't care either and he comes off like a disingenuous prick. There's no other way to explain ranking Mattingly or Morris or Murphy so high over guys like Trammell and Edgar and especially Bagwell. Heyman obviously doesn't give a shit about the numbers, and like you implied, his mind is already made up before looking at any numbers or research. For him it's just a matter of finding any numbers to help or hurt the HOF case of a player after the fact. Like Opening Day starts. Who gives a flying fuck? How can anybody take that stat seriously as a sign of greatness? Does he really think Morris was as good as Walter Johnson?? <br /><br />I think Heyman's numerical rankings stopped after #20. Once he got to the so-called "ballot busters" he simply listed them in alphabetical order. That would explain Womack listed ahead of Young.<br /><br />Heyman flat out lies when he says "the steroid taint doesn't automatically eliminate anyone from my ballot" since he then lists McGwire and Palmeiro on a DQ'd list. If he was being sincere, he would subjectively determine where to place his perception of a clean McGwire and clean Palmeiro into his rankings. For example, maybe he thinks clean McGwire was just a little better than Edgar. But he doesn't even bother to do that. He just DQ's them automatically, which he said he wouldn't do. Yet I promise you he won't DQ Andy Pettitte, an admitted HGH user, in a few years. He has tweeted that Pettitte is right on the borderline and he may even vote for him. <br /><br />Now here's that Player A / Player B game:<br /><br />Pitcher A: 2451 IP, ERA- 89, FIP- 91, 1.26 WHIP, 5.39 K/9, 1.63 BB/9, 1.20 HR/9<br /><br />Pitcher B: 3824 IP, ERA- 95, FIP- 97, 1.30 WHIP, 5.83 K/9, 3.27 BB/9, 0.92 HR/9 <br /><br />Pitcher A, by rate stats, was a more effective pitcher than Pitcher B. Better ERA, better FIP far fewer walks, better WHIP. Pitcher B was still an above average pitcher who compiled 1400 more innings than Pitcher A, but he clearly is not a great pitcher.<br /><br />Pitcher A is Radke, who Heyman ranks 19th. Pitcher B is Morris, who Heyman ranks 1st, ahead of dudes like Bagwell, Larkin, Edgar, Raines, etc.<br /><br />I'm not saying that Radke had more career value than Morris. Those extra 1400 innings do make a difference. But the difference in their career value does not warrant that wide a ranking disparity. And if Radke was not great, which Heyman readily accepts, then neither was Morris. Not very close, either. As you said, Morris is the exact definition of the good but not great compiler that Heyman should theoretically never vote for if he is looking for greatness. <br /><br />But Jon Heyman is a fucking douchebag moron, so logic and objectivity don't factor into any of this.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-102327997051254703.post-52783390319625013462012-02-18T06:59:14.098-05:002012-02-18T06:59:14.098-05:00I always hate those tragic stories of how clean li...I always hate those tragic stories of how clean living ruined promising careersMurraynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-102327997051254703.post-81369176359438994172012-02-18T06:18:28.881-05:002012-02-18T06:18:28.881-05:00Dr. Jon Heyman, chiropractor.
That one had me in ...Dr. Jon Heyman, chiropractor.<br /><br />That one had me in stitchesMurraynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-102327997051254703.post-10252612300284951712012-02-17T22:24:22.322-05:002012-02-17T22:24:22.322-05:00I think "Crime Dog" is probably the grea...I think "Crime Dog" is probably the greatest nickname of the last 40 years. I'd say 50, but that would overlap Dick "Dr. Strangeglove" Stuart and we can't have that.Justin Zethhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11960963276563539839noreply@blogger.com