All Forums > SimLeague Baseball > MLB > Roy Halladay retiring -- HOF career?
12/10/2013 12:06 PM
Posted by tecwrg on 12/10/2013 12:01:00 PM (view original):
How was Mike Mussina "significantly better" than Halladay?
800 more innings, 700 more strikeouts, same career WHIP, longer peak, 20 more wins above replacement.

Halladay has the better ERA+ but if you bring Mussina's IP down to Halladay's, that advantage is eliminated.
12/10/2013 12:12 PM
Posted by tecwrg on 12/10/2013 8:22:00 AM (view original):
Posted by burnsy483 on 12/10/2013 7:31:00 AM (view original):
I don't care much if a player leads the league in RBI. Mays did lead the league in OPS+ 6 times, and added a ton of value with his legs and defense. He also has the counting stats to be HOF-worthy than Halladay does not have.

If you want me to vote for a player for the HOF, and you don't have the counting numbers to do it, I want you to have a dominant peak, to be considered by many to be the best for multiple years. I don't think it's obvious Halladay was the best for more than a few years. Although, he did lead in ERA+ once, which is probably a better stat than ERA. So I'll give you that stat. But yea, be dominant if you have a shorter career. Be Pedro. Be Koufax.
"I want you to have a dominant peak, to be considered by many to be the best for multiple years. I don't think it's obvious Halladay was the best for more than a few years."
 
Over a nine season span (2003 - 2011), Halliday went 151-68 (average of 17-8), with three 20 win seasons, a 2.97 ERA, and a 147+ ERA plus.  He also led or tied for the league lead in complete games in 7 of those 9 seasons, and finished in the top five of Cy Young Award voting 7 out of those 9 seasons (winning twice).

How does that not fit your "requirement"?
No.  Be dominant, be better than everyone else, not "as good" as the best guys.

Be Koufax.  Be Pedro.  Or, pitch for longer.
12/10/2013 12:17 PM
You clearly didn't watch Halladay pitch. Had he been in a bigger market, this wouldn't even be a discussion. He also pitched to game situation - he pitched to contact and risked giving up runs with big leads if it helped him get outs quicker. His numbers could be even better than they are.

He was an absolute stud and for a 6-7 year span (maybe more), there was NO other pitcher I would have wanted in a big game.
This post has a rating of , which is below the default threshold.
12/10/2013 12:23 PM
Halladay was that kind of guy though. They did an interview with him earlier in his career when he started turning things around and asked him what changed for him and he basically said "I realized I could get an out with one pitch instead of 3." He could still get the K's and big outs when he needed to, but he pitched to contact whenever the game situation would allow it. He did whatever it took to get his team the W.
12/10/2013 12:26 PM
Maddux and Haren were also his only contemporaries with better BB/9 rates
12/10/2013 12:31 PM
Posted by Jtpsops on 12/10/2013 12:17:00 PM (view original):
You clearly didn't watch Halladay pitch. Had he been in a bigger market, this wouldn't even be a discussion. He also pitched to game situation - he pitched to contact and risked giving up runs with big leads if it helped him get outs quicker. His numbers could be even better than they are.

He was an absolute stud and for a 6-7 year span (maybe more), there was NO other pitcher I would have wanted in a big game.
I don't think anyone is saying that Halladay wasn't very, very good. It's just that, to be a starting pitcher with a limited amount of innings, you have to be on another level if you want to make it to the Hall of Fame.

I don't think Halladay was on that level. Close, but not quite.

And you'd pick Halladay over every other pitcher? I'd take Pedro's peak over Halladay's every time.
12/10/2013 12:32 PM
Posted by bad_luck on 12/10/2013 12:06:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 12/10/2013 12:01:00 PM (view original):
How was Mike Mussina "significantly better" than Halladay?
800 more innings, 700 more strikeouts, same career WHIP, longer peak, 20 more wins above replacement.

Halladay has the better ERA+ but if you bring Mussina's IP down to Halladay's, that advantage is eliminated.
Oh.  The "more is better" argument.

Yeah, that's retarded.
12/10/2013 12:32 PM
Posted by burnsy483 on 12/10/2013 12:12:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 12/10/2013 8:22:00 AM (view original):
Posted by burnsy483 on 12/10/2013 7:31:00 AM (view original):
I don't care much if a player leads the league in RBI. Mays did lead the league in OPS+ 6 times, and added a ton of value with his legs and defense. He also has the counting stats to be HOF-worthy than Halladay does not have.

If you want me to vote for a player for the HOF, and you don't have the counting numbers to do it, I want you to have a dominant peak, to be considered by many to be the best for multiple years. I don't think it's obvious Halladay was the best for more than a few years. Although, he did lead in ERA+ once, which is probably a better stat than ERA. So I'll give you that stat. But yea, be dominant if you have a shorter career. Be Pedro. Be Koufax.
"I want you to have a dominant peak, to be considered by many to be the best for multiple years. I don't think it's obvious Halladay was the best for more than a few years."
 
Over a nine season span (2003 - 2011), Halliday went 151-68 (average of 17-8), with three 20 win seasons, a 2.97 ERA, and a 147+ ERA plus.  He also led or tied for the league lead in complete games in 7 of those 9 seasons, and finished in the top five of Cy Young Award voting 7 out of those 9 seasons (winning twice).

How does that not fit your "requirement"?
No.  Be dominant, be better than everyone else, not "as good" as the best guys.

Be Koufax.  Be Pedro.  Or, pitch for longer.
He won two CYA's.

Is that not "better"?
12/10/2013 12:39 PM
Posted by tecwrg on 12/10/2013 12:32:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 12/10/2013 12:06:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 12/10/2013 12:01:00 PM (view original):
How was Mike Mussina "significantly better" than Halladay?
800 more innings, 700 more strikeouts, same career WHIP, longer peak, 20 more wins above replacement.

Halladay has the better ERA+ but if you bring Mussina's IP down to Halladay's, that advantage is eliminated.
Oh.  The "more is better" argument.

Yeah, that's retarded.
It's not "more is better." It's "more has value."

If two pitchers have similar stats and one does it over more innings, he had more value than the guy with less innings. 
12/10/2013 12:50 PM
OK.  Thanks for the explanation, jrd_x.
12/10/2013 12:52 PM
Posted by tecwrg on 12/10/2013 12:32:00 PM (view original):
Posted by burnsy483 on 12/10/2013 12:12:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 12/10/2013 8:22:00 AM (view original):
Posted by burnsy483 on 12/10/2013 7:31:00 AM (view original):
I don't care much if a player leads the league in RBI. Mays did lead the league in OPS+ 6 times, and added a ton of value with his legs and defense. He also has the counting stats to be HOF-worthy than Halladay does not have.

If you want me to vote for a player for the HOF, and you don't have the counting numbers to do it, I want you to have a dominant peak, to be considered by many to be the best for multiple years. I don't think it's obvious Halladay was the best for more than a few years. Although, he did lead in ERA+ once, which is probably a better stat than ERA. So I'll give you that stat. But yea, be dominant if you have a shorter career. Be Pedro. Be Koufax.
"I want you to have a dominant peak, to be considered by many to be the best for multiple years. I don't think it's obvious Halladay was the best for more than a few years."
 
Over a nine season span (2003 - 2011), Halliday went 151-68 (average of 17-8), with three 20 win seasons, a 2.97 ERA, and a 147+ ERA plus.  He also led or tied for the league lead in complete games in 7 of those 9 seasons, and finished in the top five of Cy Young Award voting 7 out of those 9 seasons (winning twice).

How does that not fit your "requirement"?
No.  Be dominant, be better than everyone else, not "as good" as the best guys.

Be Koufax.  Be Pedro.  Or, pitch for longer.
He won two CYA's.

Is that not "better"?
Look at Halladay's 2003 and then look at Pedro's. Then tell me that giving the award to Halladay wasn't a mistake.

He was the best in the NL in 2010. But Hernandez was the best pitcher in baseball that year.
12/10/2013 12:53 PM
Posted by tecwrg on 12/10/2013 12:50:00 PM (view original):
OK.  Thanks for the explanation, jrd_x.
?

Do you disagree?
12/10/2013 1:41 PM
Posted by bad_luck on 12/10/2013 12:53:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 12/10/2013 12:50:00 PM (view original):
OK.  Thanks for the explanation, jrd_x.
?

Do you disagree?
We discussed this around a year and a half ago, jrd_x.  Go back and look it up.
12/10/2013 1:44 PM
Posted by bad_luck on 12/10/2013 12:52:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 12/10/2013 12:32:00 PM (view original):
Posted by burnsy483 on 12/10/2013 12:12:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 12/10/2013 8:22:00 AM (view original):
Posted by burnsy483 on 12/10/2013 7:31:00 AM (view original):
I don't care much if a player leads the league in RBI. Mays did lead the league in OPS+ 6 times, and added a ton of value with his legs and defense. He also has the counting stats to be HOF-worthy than Halladay does not have.

If you want me to vote for a player for the HOF, and you don't have the counting numbers to do it, I want you to have a dominant peak, to be considered by many to be the best for multiple years. I don't think it's obvious Halladay was the best for more than a few years. Although, he did lead in ERA+ once, which is probably a better stat than ERA. So I'll give you that stat. But yea, be dominant if you have a shorter career. Be Pedro. Be Koufax.
"I want you to have a dominant peak, to be considered by many to be the best for multiple years. I don't think it's obvious Halladay was the best for more than a few years."
 
Over a nine season span (2003 - 2011), Halliday went 151-68 (average of 17-8), with three 20 win seasons, a 2.97 ERA, and a 147+ ERA plus.  He also led or tied for the league lead in complete games in 7 of those 9 seasons, and finished in the top five of Cy Young Award voting 7 out of those 9 seasons (winning twice).

How does that not fit your "requirement"?
No.  Be dominant, be better than everyone else, not "as good" as the best guys.

Be Koufax.  Be Pedro.  Or, pitch for longer.
He won two CYA's.

Is that not "better"?
Look at Halladay's 2003 and then look at Pedro's. Then tell me that giving the award to Halladay wasn't a mistake.

He was the best in the NL in 2010. But Hernandez was the best pitcher in baseball that year.
According to BL, aka jrd_x, "more is better".

Halladay pitched around 80 more innings than Pedro.  Therefore . . .
of 8
All Forums > SimLeague Baseball > MLB > Roy Halladay retiring -- HOF career?

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.