Posted by Jtpsops on 12/29/2016 12:03:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 12/24/2016 5:24:00 PM (view original):

Posted by d_rock97 on 12/24/2016 5:09:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 12/24/2016 3:27:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Jtpsops on 12/24/2016 1:23:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 12/24/2016 12:39:00 AM (view original):
No, not really. Rivera and Hoffman aren't even close. Plus, add in Rivera's post-season numbers and the gap between the two is even bigger.

Who gives a damn? Ruth and Aaron aren't close - does that mean Aaron shouldn't be in? The point is, if you're going to let Rivera in, you can't apply some anti-reliever stance to Hoffman. Hoffman is a HOF reliever.

Did I say that Hoffman doesn't belong?

My comment was is response to "If you put Rivera in, you HAVE to put Hoffman in". As if they're virtually identical. They're not. Rivera is well ahead of Hoffman in all the numbers. Inclusion of Rivera does not infer an automatic inclusion of Hoffman.

They're like 1 & 2 as in the best relievers of all time.

You HAVE to have Hoffman in if you have Rivera in there as well

Actually, you don't. Because Rivera is #1 of all time. And even if you want to consider Hoffman as the #2 all time, he's a distant second. That's how good Rivera was compared to all other relievers in the history of MLB.

The point is, if you're including Rivera, you clearly don't have a "NO RELIEVERS!" stance (which is good). And the only argument anyone could have against Hoffman's inclusion is if they have a "NO RELIEVERS!" stance.

So yes, if you're willing to elect Rivera, there is zero reason not to elect Hoffman. Even if he's a "distant" second to Rivera, he's also well up on the next closest reliever behind him.

That is not the only argument. It may be YOUR view that it is the only argument, but others my have different arguments. I'm not saying Hoffman does not belong in the hall. He probably does.

You're correct...I should rephrase. I don't see what other argument anyone could have against Hoffman's inclusion, unless you think Rivera is the one and only RP that should be in the HOF. And that would not make any sense.

Why not? He clearly is far and away better than any other reliever in the history of the game. I can see an argument for "I don't believe in relievers in the HOF, but Rivera is the one and only exception".

Skinniest kid at fat camp.

since there are already other relief pitchers in the Hall, its a moot point.

I grew up in the 70's when gossage,marshall,sutter would pitch 90 innings or more many times.I dont have numbers in front of me but i dont know if hoffman ever pitched 80 innings.Rivera once pitched 108 innings as a setup man.im pretty sure hoffman will get in but it may take awhile

Hoffman topped 80 innings 3 times...hit 90 once. He was slightly less than Rivera in IP/G (1.05 to 1.15)

yeah, but it was 80 innings for the Padres. who cared?

Posted by wylie715 on 1/3/2017 7:07:00 PM (view original):
yeah, but it was 80 innings for the Padres. who cared?

Clearly you're going to make whatever rationalizations you have to in order to exclude Hoffman, so there's really no point in continuing this debate.

I don't think anybody is trying to exclude Hoffman. Just pointing out the absurdity of the attempted "If Rivera, then also Hoffman" argument.

There's no comparison between the two. Hoffman may be able to get in on his own merit, but it's ridiculous to insist that he HAS to get in on Rivera's coattails as if they're equals.

Posted by tecwrg on 1/4/2017 10:38:00 AM (view original):
I don't think anybody is trying to exclude Hoffman. Just pointing out the absurdity of the attempted "If Rivera, then also Hoffman" argument.

There's no comparison between the two. Hoffman may be able to get in on his own merit, but it's ridiculous to insist that he HAS to get in on Rivera's coattails as if they're equals.

Well, I'm not arguing for Hoffman, but there certainly is a comparison between the two.

River has about 200 more IP, but their ERAs are relatively close (2.76 vs 3.08), their WHIPs are relatively close (1.00 vs 1.05) and their save totals are relatively close (652 vs 601).

Posted by tecwrg on 1/4/2017 10:38:00 AM (view original):
I don't think anybody is trying to exclude Hoffman. Just pointing out the absurdity of the attempted "If Rivera, then also Hoffman" argument.

There's no comparison between the two. Hoffman may be able to get in on his own merit, but it's ridiculous to insist that he HAS to get in on Rivera's coattails as if they're equals.

I disagree re: absurdity. Unless your argument is "Mariano Rivera is the one and only reliever who should ever get in the HOF", then there's no reason to exclude Hoffman. Hoffman is clearly the second best RP of all time and I see no reason why you'd limit a position to representation by only one player in the HOF.

Probably a mistake to get into the middle of this, but I think the main reason people view Rivera as a slam-dunk is postseason performance. You can look up how ridiculously good his playoff stats were. There's no need to list them. If you could use his playoff career as a sim season, it would be $7M+, I'd guess.

Meanwhile, Hoffman pitched in exactly one WS game. Lee Smith made it to the playoffs twice.

And Rivera didn't just get there virtually every season, he excelled under the brightest of lights.

But don't ask me why postseason greatness didn't get Jack Morris more votes. I haven't exactly figured out Hall voters. And Raines never got to the playoffs in his prime, which is the only explanation I have for his exclusion.

If you think relievers deserve to be in the Hall of Fame, then you must believe one of these:
- Rivera, by virtue of being the best reliever ever (arguable), should be the ONLY one in the HOF
- Hoffman, by virtue of being one of the top five relievers ever (not really arguable) should be in the HOF

The only other option is that since Rivera/Hoffman are roughly contemporaries, then you think Rivera should go in FIRST, followed by Hoffman next year. But then how do you explain the relievers that are already in? This is based on the argument that it is "better" to be a first-ballot HOFer, as opposed to a Vet's committee or a last-chance entry.

Posted by bad_luck on 1/4/2017 11:47:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 1/4/2017 10:38:00 AM (view original):
I don't think anybody is trying to exclude Hoffman. Just pointing out the absurdity of the attempted "If Rivera, then also Hoffman" argument.

There's no comparison between the two. Hoffman may be able to get in on his own merit, but it's ridiculous to insist that he HAS to get in on Rivera's coattails as if they're equals.

Well, I'm not arguing for Hoffman, but there certainly is a comparison between the two.

River has about 200 more IP, but their ERAs are relatively close (2.76 vs 3.08), their WHIPs are relatively close (1.00 vs 1.05) and their save totals are relatively close (652 vs 601).

Good to see that you're just as dumb in 2017 as you were in past years.

Lets use some of your favorite advanced metrics to compare the two.

Let's start with your absolute favorite, WAR (************!!!!)

Mariano Rivera: 56.6
Trevor Hoffman: 28.0 (less than half of Rivera's)

Not even close.

Let's look at another of your favorites, ERA+:

Mariano Rivera: 205*
Trevor Hoffman: 141

Again, not even close.

* To put the ERA+ number in a little perspective, here are the top 15 all-time for pitchers with over 1,000 career IP:

Rank	Player (yrs, age)	Adjusted ERA+	Throws
1.	Mariano Rivera (19)	205	R
2.	Clayton Kershaw (9, 28)	159	L
3.	Pedro Martinez+ (18)	154	R
4.	Jim Devlin (5)	150	R
5.	Lefty Grove+ (17)	148	L
6.	Walter Johnson+ (21)	147	R
	Hoyt Wilhelm+ (21)	147	R
8.	Dan Quisenberry (12)	146	R
	Smoky Joe Wood (14)	146	R
10.	Ed Walsh+ (14)	145	R
11.	Roger Clemens (24)	143	R
12.	Addie Joss+ (9)	142	R
	Brandon Webb (7)	142	R
14.	Trevor Hoffman (18)	141	R
15.	Kid Nichols+ (15)	140	R

Which one of those, I ask, is not like the others?