Rivera got all votes & Moose, Doc, Edgar made it in *
by 206er (2019-01-22 18:34:42)




I'm surprised at Mo's being unanimous b/c of closer bias. *
by SavageDragon  (2019-01-23 08:57:13)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


Bias? They pitch 60 innings a year
by Brew City Domer  (2019-01-23 10:37:13)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Should Mo have been the first unanimous player? Probably not, but only because it should have happened a while ago with some inner-circle legends (Ruth, Robinson, Gehrig, Mays, Mantle, Williams, etc.). He's a no-doubt, first-ballot Hall-of-Famer, and probably the only one from his line of work.

But he faced 268 batters per year. Halladay faced 3x as many. To put it into perspective, Here is a list of batters from last year who had roughly the same number of plate appearances as Mo's average batters-faced. By contrast, elite batters are putting up 650+ PAs per year.


Roy Halladay gave up one less ER in the postseason than Mo
by DBCooper  (2019-01-23 14:50:29)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

In 103 less innings


Meh, Rivera was a one trick pony.
by BeastOfBourbon  (2019-01-25 10:42:18)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

I mean, take away that cutter and what have you got?

I’m kidding, of course. I doubt we’ll ever see another one like Mo again.


Rivera’s postseason record might be the best by any athlete
by bizdomer09  (2019-01-23 18:38:34)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

in any sport, especially considering how expansive it was - a body of work equivalent to well more than a full regular season. How he managed to find that higher postseason gear and consistently sustain it over that many years is beyond me.


Gehrig's career WS OPS of 1.241 raises question whether...
by Scoop80  (2019-01-24 12:11:24)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Rivera has all-time best NYY postseason resume. Gehrig's OPS would be even higher had he not had an off Series in 1938, when he may've been in early stages of ALS.

As to other sports, it's pretty damned hard to compare T. Brady's postseason record (or that of a QB we had at ND in my day) to Rivera's. IIRC, MJ was NBA Finals MVP in all 6 of Bulls' title seasons, and he carried da Bulls to 2 conference finals against the Bad Boys before the title run.

Rivera had an awe-inspiring postseason record. How it compares to others' records involves considerable subjectivity.


I can never argue against Jordan
by bizdomer09  (2019-01-25 07:35:21)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

He played both sides of the ball for the whole game. In that sense Rivera can’t compare. Jordan essentially dominated the NBA playoffs for the ‘90s. Even before the Bulls broke through against the Pistons, Detroit’s entire game plan was built around Jordan.

I can give you Gehrig for the World Series, but his playoff record (about 150 ABs) is not extensive enough to compare to what Rivera did in 140 innings across nearly 100 appearances. Of course it’s not at all Gehrig’s fault that there was only one playoff round then. Had he been given the opportunity to replicate what he did a few more times over across 700 plate appearances like Jeter, maybe he would have been able to maintain that same level of performance as we see with Rivera, but it’s highly unlikely.

If we are talking about most impressive individual cumulative playoff stat line, I’ll stand by my original answer of Rivera. He controlled the part of the game he could influence (9th and sometimes 8th from the mound) beyond what anyone has ever done in any sport. If we’re picking someone who controlled entire playoff seasons, then that opens up the conversation and I would go with Jordan. Sorry Bill Russell there were 9 teams in the NBA when you played.


MJ/Russell; Montana/Brady - no one else is even close *
by Irish2003  (2019-01-25 02:53:47)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


He allowed 111 men on base over 141 innings with a 0.70
by voidoid  (2019-01-23 22:23:55)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

earned run average in the postseason. That many innings is almost two seasons for a closer. Absolutely remarkable dominance.


more people have been on the moon than scored on him
by DBCooper  (2019-01-24 09:27:17)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

in the postseason


12 men on moon, 13 runs allowed (11 earned) (link)
by jclay  (2019-01-26 18:51:24)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


So basically Eckersley's 1990 season and
by tdiddy07  (2019-01-24 09:18:08)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

name-your-second-best-reliever-season-of-all-time put together. Against the best teams the sport has to offer for two seasons.


That's insane *
by Brew City Domer  (2019-01-23 15:09:17)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


I’m not understanding this supposed closer bias
by sprack  (2019-01-23 09:31:00)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Who are the closers not in the Hall who should be?


Some top relievers have had to wait a bit.
by Bruno95  (2019-01-23 10:02:17)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Hoffman missed out in his first two years of eligibility. Lee Smith just made it in.


I would have made Hoffman wait for Mariano.
by tdiddy07  (2019-01-23 18:41:30)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Precisely because I'm biased against closers.


I've watched Hoffman pitch hundreds of times, either live
by voidoid  (2019-01-24 11:59:23)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

or televised. He was an outstanding closer. In his prime, his change-up was untouchable, and even past his prime, it was barely touchable. When the first bell tolled from Hell's Bells and bullpen door swung open, it was game over. His career totals are deserving of Cooperstown.

I think Hoffman was inducted into the Hall fairly - that is to say, I am glad he was evaluated on his own merits rather than directly compared to Rivera, or made to wait for Rivera.

That said, he is still miles behind Rivera in terms of dominance. There simply isn't anyone in Mariano's league.


Yeah, but Smith is a bit of a stretch
by sprack  (2019-01-23 15:20:09)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

I don't put him in the same class as Hoffman. As for Hoffman, 2 years isn't that long. He was going to get in sooner rather than later. He barely missed in his first 2 years. I would argue also that being a Padre for most of his career didn't help either.

Put it this way, I can't think of any closer not in the Hall right now who I would say is long overdue - unlike, say the DH bias where keeping Edgar out until two days ago was patently ridiculous. Hoffman waited 2 years, Edgar waited 15.


In 2022 you’ll have Bonds/Clemens getting voted on
by miamioh_irishfan  (2019-01-22 22:35:46)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

For the final time, almost certainly neither getting the 75% needed to gain induction, and you’ll have David Ortiz being voted on for the first time and likely getting the nod while also being the only one of those three to have failed a drug test.


Why do you think Ortiz will get in?
by NavyJoe  (2019-01-23 11:04:44)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Is there any indication he will be looked upon more favorably than Bonds, Clemens, etc?


Just a hunch. You might be right
by miamioh_irishfan  (2019-01-23 16:47:01)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

But I think the fun-loving big papi persona will help him with voters.


I'm not sure. I mean, I tend to agree
by jt  (2019-01-23 10:50:50)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

but there just really aren't a lot of good candidates in the coming years. jeter next year, but not much besides that.

I mean, I guess the writers could just vote for one or two guys or nobody but I would guess some guys will pick up votes for Bonds now that the big names have all been elected. I would imagine that a guy like Larry Walker will be elected next year, possibly Curt Schilling as well.


I bet that Jeter will go in alone
by Tubes  (2019-01-23 11:44:32)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

The voters love doing stuff like that. RE2PECT, and whatnot.

Like you mentioned, there really isn't anyone noteworthy coming up in 2021, so Schilling and Walker will probably get in then.


I think next year is Walker's last year on the ballot
by jt  (2019-01-23 13:01:51)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

not positive though


You're correct
by Tubes  (2019-01-23 14:36:18)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

I thought I saw that next year was his 9th, but looks like this year was.

In that case, they better vote Schilling in next year, too, because if he's the only speaker in 2021 there's nothing stopping him from talking for an hour about chemtrails and gay frogs.


Harold Baines Veteran Committee will vote them in 1st ballot *
by Father Nieuwland  (2019-01-22 22:50:04)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


I bet that the vet committee will be tougher for those guys
by jt  (2019-01-23 10:51:17)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

than the regular ballot.


Looking at the committee member roster, I disagree
by Father Nieuwland  (2019-01-23 12:12:49)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Morgan will probably have a stroke, but many of the others knew who was taking what.

From Baseballhall.org

The 16-member Today’s Game Era Committee commissioned with the review of the 10-name ballot was comprised of Hall of Fame members Roberto Alomar, Bert Blyleven, Pat Gillick, Tony La Russa, Greg Maddux, Joe Morgan, John Schuerholz, Ozzie Smith and Joe Torre; major league executives Al Avila, Paul Beeston, Andy MacPhail and Jerry Reinsdorf; and veteran media members/historians Steve Hirdt, Tim Kurkjian and Claire Smith. Hall of Fame Chairman of the Board Jane Forbes Clark served as the non-voting chairman of the Today’s Baseball Era Committee.


Rivera deserved the unanimous vote. *
by Bruno95  (2019-01-22 19:28:28)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


Agreed
by HTownND  (2019-01-22 20:17:19)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Now that the seal has been broken, hopefully we don't have any jackasses who don't vote for obvious candidates just to keep some ridiculous legacy.


I wouldn't hold my breath on that. *
by Porpoiseboy  (2019-01-22 20:52:54)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


The Mussina debate is settled. Sorry Cartright *
by Nyirish08  (2019-01-22 19:22:05)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


One of the most underrated pitchers
by Tubes  (2019-01-23 00:32:53)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

He'd get a lot more love if he was pitching now, when wins aren't the most important stat for a pitcher. And if he wasn't pitching in the same league as Pedro and Clemens.


So two more Yankees made it, eh? *
by G.K.Chesterton  (2019-01-22 21:32:45)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


He is deserving of a spot alongside Harold Baines *
by Father Nieuwland  (2019-01-22 19:33:11)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


First unanimous. Well deserved
by DBCooper  (2019-01-22 18:42:27)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

He should not have been the first, but I’m glad he is. As classy a player as you could hope to cheer for.


I'm fine with him being the first
by ShermanOaksND  (2019-01-22 22:44:27)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

The class he exudes, I suspect, is a big reason why he earned that honor.


Even moreso since closers are not highly valued by the HOF *
by Jvan  (2019-01-22 19:14:05)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post