Catfish Hunter deserves to be a HOFer.

Posted by bad_luck on 11/16/2017 5:22:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Tdiddy on 11/16/2017 5:17:00 PM (view original):
I'm a huge sox fan living in NY amongst Yankee fans. Not all of us agree he should be in. Some Yankee fans do and some don't. I'm not gonna make a case with numbers; everyone can cherry pick whatever numbers they want. I'm not even sure if I wasn't a sox fan that i would think this way...but within five years of him being on the ballot he will be in.

Well...yeah. Whether he does get in and whether he belongs in are two different questions.

For instance, Catfish Hunter is in the Hall of Fame, by definition, he's a Hall of Famer.

But he shouldn't be, because he isn't a hall of fame quality pitcher.

He's not a hall of fame quality pitcher IN YOUR OPINION!! Just because its your opinion, that does not make it true. I'm not even commenting on Hunter's qualifications for the hall. I'm commenting on your belief that because you think something is true, it must be true. That ain't the way it works.

Posted by tecwrg on 11/16/2017 5:38:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 11/16/2017 5:34:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 11/16/2017 5:30:00 PM (view original):
We've already discussed Hunter ad nauseam.

One of the best pitchers of his generation, he deserves to be in the HOF. You're flat-out wrong saying he doesn't deserve to be there. And drastically points out how your blind adherence to stats and only stats make you a moron in terms of baseball knowledge.

He just wasn't one of the best pitchers of his generation. That's ridiculous. He was maybe the best pitcher in the AL once...twice if you squint a little when you look at the numbers. And that's it. He had one other really good year and then the rest were just mediocre or bad.

Three really good years isn't a hall of fame career.

" He just wasn't one of the best pitchers of his generation. "

I like that you used Trump for that. It's appropriate considering how the truth is the opposite of what he's saying and you aren't using any evidence to back up your claim.

Hunter was great...in 1974. Him, Perry, Blyleven and Tiant were the class of the AL.

He was also pretty great in 1975. Right up there with Palmer in the argument for best pitcher in the league.

He was really good in 1972...but not close to Perry that year. And that's really it in terms of greatness. He was above average in 1967. Same for 1971. And then he was meh-to-bad.

If that guy came up now, you'd laugh out loud at anyone who suggested he belonged. He'd drop off the ballot after his first year of eligibility.

Posted by wylie715 on 11/16/2017 5:57:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 11/16/2017 5:22:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Tdiddy on 11/16/2017 5:17:00 PM (view original):
I'm a huge sox fan living in NY amongst Yankee fans. Not all of us agree he should be in. Some Yankee fans do and some don't. I'm not gonna make a case with numbers; everyone can cherry pick whatever numbers they want. I'm not even sure if I wasn't a sox fan that i would think this way...but within five years of him being on the ballot he will be in.

Well...yeah. Whether he does get in and whether he belongs in are two different questions.

For instance, Catfish Hunter is in the Hall of Fame, by definition, he's a Hall of Famer.

But he shouldn't be, because he isn't a hall of fame quality pitcher.

He's not a hall of fame quality pitcher IN YOUR OPINION!! Just because its your opinion, that does not make it true. I'm not even commenting on Hunter's qualifications for the hall. I'm commenting on your belief that because you think something is true, it must be true. That ain't the way it works.

This is a forum where people state their opinions.

Of course that's my opinion. I'm not writing laws. What the **** else would it be???

Posted by bad_luck on 11/16/2017 5:59:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 11/16/2017 5:38:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 11/16/2017 5:34:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 11/16/2017 5:30:00 PM (view original):
We've already discussed Hunter ad nauseam.

One of the best pitchers of his generation, he deserves to be in the HOF. You're flat-out wrong saying he doesn't deserve to be there. And drastically points out how your blind adherence to stats and only stats make you a moron in terms of baseball knowledge.

He just wasn't one of the best pitchers of his generation. That's ridiculous. He was maybe the best pitcher in the AL once...twice if you squint a little when you look at the numbers. And that's it. He had one other really good year and then the rest were just mediocre or bad.

Three really good years isn't a hall of fame career.

" He just wasn't one of the best pitchers of his generation. "

I like that you used Trump for that. It's appropriate considering how the truth is the opposite of what he's saying and you aren't using any evidence to back up your claim.

Hunter was great...in 1974. Him, Perry, Blyleven and Tiant were the class of the AL.

He was also pretty great in 1975. Right up there with Palmer in the argument for best pitcher in the league.

He was really good in 1972...but not close to Perry that year. And that's really it in terms of greatness. He was above average in 1967. Same for 1971. And then he was meh-to-bad.

If that guy came up now, you'd laugh out loud at anyone who suggested he belonged. He'd drop off the ballot after his first year of eligibility.

ERA.......Whip......IP..........SO......ERA+
3.40........1.225....3186......1728......110
3.26........1.134....3449......2012......104
3.28........1.222....3256......2397......127

One of these guys should be in the HOF. One had a very mediocre career. And the other is Milt Pappas.

I'll let you figure out which is which.

Posted by bad_luck on 11/16/2017 6:00:00 PM (view original):

Posted by wylie715 on 11/16/2017 5:57:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 11/16/2017 5:22:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Tdiddy on 11/16/2017 5:17:00 PM (view original):
I'm a huge sox fan living in NY amongst Yankee fans. Not all of us agree he should be in. Some Yankee fans do and some don't. I'm not gonna make a case with numbers; everyone can cherry pick whatever numbers they want. I'm not even sure if I wasn't a sox fan that i would think this way...but within five years of him being on the ballot he will be in.

Well...yeah. Whether he does get in and whether he belongs in are two different questions.

For instance, Catfish Hunter is in the Hall of Fame, by definition, he's a Hall of Famer.

But he shouldn't be, because he isn't a hall of fame quality pitcher.

He's not a hall of fame quality pitcher IN YOUR OPINION!! Just because its your opinion, that does not make it true. I'm not even commenting on Hunter's qualifications for the hall. I'm commenting on your belief that because you think something is true, it must be true. That ain't the way it works.

This is a forum where people state their opinions.

Of course that's my opinion. I'm not writing laws. What the **** else would it be???

well, you didn't say in your opinion he is not a hall of fame quality pitcher, you said "he is not a hall of fame quality pitcher." Maybe you didn't mean to imply that as a fact, but it sure reads that way.

Posted by wylie715 on 11/16/2017 6:07:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 11/16/2017 6:00:00 PM (view original):

Posted by wylie715 on 11/16/2017 5:57:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 11/16/2017 5:22:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Tdiddy on 11/16/2017 5:17:00 PM (view original):
I'm a huge sox fan living in NY amongst Yankee fans. Not all of us agree he should be in. Some Yankee fans do and some don't. I'm not gonna make a case with numbers; everyone can cherry pick whatever numbers they want. I'm not even sure if I wasn't a sox fan that i would think this way...but within five years of him being on the ballot he will be in.

Well...yeah. Whether he does get in and whether he belongs in are two different questions.

For instance, Catfish Hunter is in the Hall of Fame, by definition, he's a Hall of Famer.

But he shouldn't be, because he isn't a hall of fame quality pitcher.

He's not a hall of fame quality pitcher IN YOUR OPINION!! Just because its your opinion, that does not make it true. I'm not even commenting on Hunter's qualifications for the hall. I'm commenting on your belief that because you think something is true, it must be true. That ain't the way it works.

This is a forum where people state their opinions.

Of course that's my opinion. I'm not writing laws. What the **** else would it be???

well, you didn't say in your opinion he is not a hall of fame quality pitcher, you said "he is not a hall of fame quality pitcher." Maybe you didn't mean to imply that as a fact, but it sure reads that way.

Prefacing every post with "in my opinion," isn't necessary in a forum.

But also, it is a fact. He's clearly not a hall of fame level pitcher. he just isn't. You can not like that I'm stating it like a fact all you want, but...jeez...it's a fact. He wasn't great and that is plainly true.

Your opinion is not fact.

Posted by bad_luck on 11/16/2017 5:14:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 11/16/2017 4:58:00 PM (view original):
Tell us again how 541 and 493 are essentially the same, mathwiz.

I didn't say they were the same. I said 541 isn't significantly more than 493. It's obviously more...but it's not so much more that one is an auto bid into the Hall and the other gets left out.

Is 147 significantly more than 140? Are 10,091 PA significantly more than 8,674 PA? I've yet to be convinced that (both) Edgar Martinez should be in but David Ortiz shouldn't.

Posted by ncmusician_7 on 11/16/2017 6:29:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 11/16/2017 5:14:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 11/16/2017 4:58:00 PM (view original):
Tell us again how 541 and 493 are essentially the same, mathwiz.

I didn't say they were the same. I said 541 isn't significantly more than 493. It's obviously more...but it's not so much more that one is an auto bid into the Hall and the other gets left out.

Is 147 significantly more than 140? Are 10,091 PA significantly more than 8,674 PA? I've yet to be convinced that (both) Edgar Martinez should be in but David Ortiz shouldn't.

147 vs 141 scaled differently than HR. EM was 47% better than the average hitter. Ortiz was 41%.

It may not seem like a lot but the difference between Ortiz and EM is larger than the OPS+ gap between Honus Wagner and EM.

No one would argue that Wagner and EM are on the same level offensively.

A handful of percentage points is a big deal in this case.

Posted by bad_luck on 11/16/2017 5:14:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 11/16/2017 4:58:00 PM (view original):
Tell us again how 541 and 493 are essentially the same, mathwiz.

I didn't say they were the same. I said 541 isn't significantly more than 493. It's obviously more...but it's not so much more that one is an auto bid into the Hall and the other gets left out.

In your world, is 10% significant or not? It's an easy question.

In his world his opinion is a fact, so who cares what he thinks.

Posted by MikeT23 on 11/16/2017 7:11:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 11/16/2017 5:14:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 11/16/2017 4:58:00 PM (view original):
Tell us again how 541 and 493 are essentially the same, mathwiz.

I didn't say they were the same. I said 541 isn't significantly more than 493. It's obviously more...but it's not so much more that one is an auto bid into the Hall and the other gets left out.

In your world, is 10% significant or not? It's an easy question.

Sometimes 10% is a lot. Sometimes it isn't.

For example, Tom Glavine has over 10% more career wins than Mike Mussina. But, even if you're the kind of person that thinks pitcher wins matter, the difference isn't significant. 305 wins isn't significantly more than 270.

On the other hand, if you throw a fastball 10% faster than another major league pitcher, that's a big difference.

OK, you're dumb. Thanks.

Posted by bad_luck on 11/16/2017 7:28:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 11/16/2017 7:11:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 11/16/2017 5:14:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 11/16/2017 4:58:00 PM (view original):
Tell us again how 541 and 493 are essentially the same, mathwiz.

I didn't say they were the same. I said 541 isn't significantly more than 493. It's obviously more...but it's not so much more that one is an auto bid into the Hall and the other gets left out.

In your world, is 10% significant or not? It's an easy question.

Sometimes 10% is a lot. Sometimes it isn't.

For example, Tom Glavine has over 10% more career wins than Mike Mussina. But, even if you're the kind of person that thinks pitcher wins matter, the difference isn't significant. 305 wins isn't significantly more than 270.

On the other hand, if you throw a fastball 10% faster than another major league pitcher, that's a big difference.

Ah ah don't dodge. Ortiz is top 10 in Doubles and the players above him are ridiculously awesome talents and HOF players and he hit MORE doubles than Barry Bonds. You also ignored the post season stats I listed to where he basically carried the Sox to their WS wins. Especially the last one.

I can also opine on Papi as I saw him play. He was must see TV especially in clutch situations and in the playoffs.

Catfish I cannot opine on as I never saw him pitch BUT I will say this I think wins are an important stat. Not the most important but still important.