Dear BG and Chris

Gave up too many HRs, only one 20 win season in which he also lost 17 games, in a 22 season career. No Cy Youngs. No MVPs, No Post Season MVPs, Played over 20 years and made only 2 all star teams. A nice player and I'm sure a good guy, but I don't think he is one of the best ever. He had a great curveball, but I don't think 20 years from now when I'm talking about all of the great players from my youth that Bert will come up.

The thing Bert is most known for is Bert "be home" Blyleven

mike

Well said.
And a really funny person, too. My friend Cathy and I got our pictures taken with him at the 40th anniversary team celebration a few years ago. He was doing the 2 fingers thing behind her. Last year we got another photo op at Twinsfest, and Cathy asked him for a "nice" picture. He nodded yes, then promptly stuck his tougue out.

Dear mike,

As a Yankee fan (you are Mike the Yankee fan right?), we wouldn't expect you to talk about Bert as one of the great players from your youth.

But he was one of the great players from my youth, and the youth of many of my fellow Batlings.

I have to agree with Chris.

"Not just for our sake. For the People's sake. For baseball's sake. And yes, for Christ's sake, put Bert in the Hall."

Well done, Chris.

Best curveball ever. Subjective? OK, but it's not only me.

All those K's. Detractors will say, "That's only because he hung around so long." So, you're supposed to discount longevity?

Bert will get in. It would be better if the writers were smart enough to do it, but at some point, he'll be in.

BTW, Chris, when the BBWAA was founded in 1908, Baseball was actually two words: Base Ball. The usage changed sometime in the '20's or '30's, I think.

Bubblemint

Yep I am a Yankees fan, I am also a baseball fan, and just because I am not a fan of a certain team doesn't mean I don't like, respect, or root for players from other teams. I have seen Bert pitch and at no time did I ever think I was watching a great pitcher. If he gets in I won't be mad at all, but if I were to get a vote it would be no.

mike

mjm-

Hey, thanks for the "Base Ball" info. As someone who adores the other time-honored, even anachronistic quirks of our great pastime, I hereby withdraw my objection to the usage of BBWAA.

I know, the Veterans' Committee wouldn't let Bert slip through the cracks, but I can see how that's small consolation to Bert. He's generally pretty good-natured about it, and I remember an interview where he said, mostly tongue-in-cheek, "Will I be deceased by the time I go in? Then what good is it? They vote guys in who've been dead thirty or forty years. I'm sure those guys are rolling over in their graves with excitement."

Again, he had 242 complete games!! Look at the top 100 at baseball almanac. If you've heard of more than 15 of those guys, I'm impressed. When we're starting to talk about putting closers in the Hall, how about putting in a guy who barely needed one?

I adore stats, and I especially adore sassy stats. The information presented by Chris is certainly sassy stats--stats that prove a point even when people won't hear it. (Did anyone else notice his career ERA was 3.31--which happens to be Mr. Santana's current career ERA?) When he went 20-17 with the Twins, it should be noted that his ERA was 2.52--that's not a guy getting lucky wins; that's a guy that's getting some unfortunate losses. Five of his 22 years had ERA less than 4.00 (and two of those years were 4.01). Six of those 22 years he pitched less than 200 innings (His first year, his last three years (one in which he did not pitch in the majors), and two years in the middle). What more do you want?

I recall when Bert came back to pitch for the Twins in the mid-80's, and hearing mention of him "coming back to the Twins". At the time, as a Wee Child, I couldn't believe he was "back"--guys pitched that long? And he didn't just come back and do "okay". He came back as a starting pitcher--and not even an "we don't have anyone else, so we might as well put him in", but a true quality starting pitcher.

For Bert's sake, put him in the Hall. There are too many numbers and too much sass for any arguments.

VERY well said! Put him in!!

Hey, how can I sign up for the BBWAA? My subscriptions to Vibe just ran out and I've got some extra dollars. I'll vote for him!

Mike -

Whitey Ford is in the Hall of Fame and he should be. However he has 51 fewer wins, 86 fewer complete games, 15 fewer shutouts, a whopping 1745 fewer strikeouts and pitched 5 fewer seasons than Bert Blyleven.

My point is not that Whitey Ford shouldn't be in the HOF. Some of his statistics are decidedly better than Blyleven's. But the main arguments against Bert's election rely on subjective arguments based on media reputation and not his actual accomplishments.

Take a player with Bert's numbers, put him in a Cubs uniform, a Dodgers uniform, or best yet, a Yankees uniform and he would have already be on the HOF Veteran's Committee.

Enough already. Send Bert to Cooperstown!

The All-Star nods and Cy Young votes shouldn't be held against him. In 1973 or '84, he had a legitimate case for winning the Cy Young, and also could have been a strong runner-up in '74 and '77. I believe he *should* have won it in '73 when he was 2nd to Palmer in ERA but tops in Adjusted ERA, 2nd to Nolan Ryan in strikeouts, 2nd to Tiant in WHIP, and led the league in K/BB ratio and Shutouts. But Jim Palmer had 22 Wins pitching for a powerhouse Orioles team while Bert merely had 20 Wins for a .500 Twins club. Palmer won the Cy Young over Nolan Ryan and Catfish Hunter. Bert barely got noticed by the voters, securing only a single 3rd place vote. Should that act of stupidity and injustice be used to deny him his rightful justice now? No.

We know how it goes. (Right, Bartolo?) And we know that when a guy pitches for a lot of mediocre teams in smaller outposts like Minnesota, Texas, Pittsburgh, and Cleveland, there aren't going to be as many All-Star slots open for him as there will be for the guys on the glamour teams who get on TV a lot. Especially in the days before constant cable TV coverage and Extra Innings packages.

As for his performance in October: he was 5-1 with a 2.47 ERA in 47.3 IP in postseason play. In 2 World Series, he was 2-1 with a 2.35 ERA in 23 IP for a pair of championship teams. What more could the man reasonably be expected to do on the big stage? Plenty of Hall of Famers (and Future HOF'ers) have done much worse when they had their shot at the title.

Bert was a great pitcher, even a dominant strikeout pitcher, for a long period of time. His HOF Standards score is 50, putting him squarely in the middle of those already in the Hall. Eight of the ten pitchers most similar to him, according to the Similarity Score calculations, are already in the Hall. He's not in because the gatekeepers have decided a HOF pitcher must have been a bright shooting star like Koufax or a member of the 300 Win Club, and also because he was never a celebrity like, say, Catfish Hunter.

Catfish ended up with a 224-166 mark and 3.26 ERA (104 ERA+), with 2012 strikeouts and 42 shutouts. Compared to Bert's 287-250, 3.31 (118 ERA+), 3701 and 60, it ain't so grand. But Catfish had that '74 Cy Young, he pitched for a lot of great teams in Oakland in New York, he had a cool nickname, and he was a celebrity who got named to several All-Star teams. Can't beat that star power, I guess.

I truly don't care one way or the other if Bert gets in. I would vot no but hey, but you want to compare him to Whitey

1 Cy Young
1 World Series MVP
2 20+ win season (1961 25-4, 1968 24-8)
Highest winning % in the history of the game .690 with a record of 236-106. 130 games over 500
Bert has 50 more wins and 144 more loses. 287-250 for a .534 winning %
8 time All Star (Whitey played 6 seasons less yet made 6 more all star teams)
6 World Series titles

Whitey led the league in era twice and wins 3 times, Bert never led the league in either.

Bert did the league in something Whitey never did Losses and most homeruns allowed.

Bert just does not stack up to the all time greats.

Here's the thing I just don't get. Forget everything else. I don't understand how a pitcher can be fifth on the all-time strikeout list and not be in the Hall of Fame. It's the "Hall of Fame." It's not the "Hall of Most Dominating in Any Given Year" or "Hall of Winners of the Most Stupid Popularity Contest Awards" or "Hall of Those Lucky Enough to be on Great Teams That Will Earn You a Lot of Wins." A pitcher who has the fifth-most strikeouts among all the pitchers who have pitched in the major leagues for 100 years should be famous, and he should be in the Hall of Fame.

Look at what Steve Carlton did with the 72 Phillies a team that won only 50 games. Don't tell me you can't pitch great for a bad team. All of Berts 250 losses were not by one run.

Bert was a very good pitcher for very a long time, but never a great one. The hall of fame is for great players, not very good ones.

Dear Mike,

Then I must say I am glad you won't be voting.

I too am a baseball fan. Bert Blyleven is a big part of the reason for that.
When my family moved to Minnesota in 1970 I fell in love with the Twins.
Harmon Killebrew, Tony Oliva, Rod Carew...Bert and all the rest.

Though I do readily admit my prejudice when it comes to Mr. Blyleven.
He was, after all, my very first baseball crush when I was 9 years old and he was a rookie pitcher at the age of 19.

But as a female baseball fan who got over the silly little schoolgirl crush and learned to love the game, I watched Bert pitch for many years. So I must also say that I respectfully disagree with you.

I hope that those who do vote will give him the consideration many of us believe he deserves.

I won't be mad if he doesn't make it in...but I do think he deserves to be there.

bubblemint

"Bert was a very good pitcher for very a long time, but never a great one. The hall of fame is for great players, not very good ones."
----------------

Mike, listen to yourself. You're saying that someone who retired with the 3rd most career strikeouts and is still in the Top 5, ranks 9th in shutouts, maintained a 118 ERA+ over 22 years, and was Money in the postseason, was not a great pitcher?

The idea that the HOF is for "great" players rather than "very good" ones has never really been applicable to the actual choices of induction. But even if it were, Bert is more deserving than many of those who have been enshrined in Cooperstown. I doubt we'd find any players with a 50 HOF Standards score whose plaques really don't belong on the wall.

I realise that on a Twins board everyone is going to be in favor of Bert making the hall and I totally understand that, but all you have to do is compare what he did with what the guys that are in did.

Yes he pitched for 22 season, yet didn't win 300 games, he is 5th all tims in strike outs, and first in homeruns allowed, 22 season and only 2.. read this again 2 all atar games !!! How does a great pitcher pitch for 22 years and only make 2 all satr games, and never win a cy young and never have a seaon were he is the best pitcher in the league and how does he never lead the league in wins ?

Like I said if he gets in it won't bother me and good for Bert for hanging in there, but he never was great. What is his defining moment in baseball ? Is it the season that he gave up 50 hrs ?

Last year I said to one of my friends... we need to get tickets for when the twins come because we HAVE to see Johan pitch, I never said that about Bert.

I've said it about Clemans, and Carlton, and Seaver, and Ryan, and Morris, And Orel, and Fernado,and Pedro, and Maddox, and Randy Johnson etc etc ... get the point.

I don't get to vote for the BBWAA but I do get to vote for the BFI (British Film Institute) and I got the ballot for their committee and there, on the bottom of the list, was one Cy Young. Who I will be voting for on general principal.

This year might be a good year for Bert as there's a lack of top notch newcomers.

D

Mike:

I am not going to say Burt should or shouldn't be in the HOF, but you use the same argument over and over again, and it's just fallacious. His lack of Cy Youngs and All-Star appearances doesn't mean he wasn't a "great" pitcher. That's like saying a student that graduates with a great GPA (and 3.31 ERA over 22 seasons is great, I think we can agree) wasn't a "great" student because they were never Homecoming royalty.
Make a better argument about what the man did, not what a bunch of hack writers & fans who were not as educated in his (pre-internet) days thought he did. Had he pitched for the Yankees for all of those years, there is absolutely no doubt he would be in the Hall.

Clay Jr: "That's like saying a student that graduates with a great GPA (and 3.31 ERA over 22 seasons is great, I think we can agree) wasn't a "great" student because they were never Homecoming royalty."

Brilliant!

Mike: Thank you for proving my earlier point - that the main detractors about Bert's credentials are subjective. Like Frightwig has pointed out, Blyleven's stat's are well within the statistical range of those pitchers already in.

I'll say it again because it's true: put Bert in a Cubs, Dodgers or Yankees uniform and he'd already be ensconced in Cooperstown.

Rob Neyer summed it up well in his opening line on the topic a few years ago, when he said: "Quite frankly, Bert Blyleven is over-qualified for the Hall of Fame".

After which he went into a long list of stats (as is his wont), some of which are stated in BG's post, and some of which are more esoteric (ballpark-adjusted stats, era-adjusted stats, etc). As I said, it was a couple of years ago, and I don't recall all the details, but the conclusion was clear: he's a solid HOF'er, not a "marginal" one. It's an injustic that he's even had to wait this long.

Well past time to circle Bert on the HOF ballot.

We all love the fan-circling, days-til-his-birthday-counting, rambling commentator, but let's not forget that if personality plays into these things, Bert might be remembered outside the Twin Cities as a crank who was always complaining and demanding he be traded. He probably also lit fires to the feet of a lot of people doing the voting. You reap what you sow.

That all said, I hope he gets in, but if he's not finding it easy, it's not necessarily because the voters are stupid.

Incidentally, Nolan Ryan never won a Cy Young either.

Being a Dutchman myself i'm a bit biased maybe, but he should definitely be in the Hall...when you go deeper into the stats that mean something (and sorry, wins and losses for a pitcher don't mean anything in my book, they are team related, not pitcher related. Cy Youngs and MVP's? Year after year the writers prove they don't have any insight into who was the best pitcher this year.), Bert is over-qualified like Rob Neyer said. Even is you want to stick to the wins-losses regime, adjusted for ballparks, time-frame and defense, Baseball Prospectus gives an expected record of 345-187, based on his performance.

I echo the sentiments here, especially Smitty's.

Frankly, I don't see the argument for keeping him out of the Hall. The Pete Rose argument I see; the Shoeless Joe argument as well. Mattingly I understand (mike, reconcile your "Mattingly for the Hall" argument with your "No Bert" argument) even though I disagree with it.

The Hall of Fame is for the people/events/things we want to live through eternity. That's why someone (mike again?) said there ought to be a special place in the Hall for Morris/Orel post-season accomplishments. I agree, if only because 5 years from now, I hope to be teaching my almost-5 year old about Jack Morris, Orel, Bert, Whitey, and yes, even Clemens. (Don't one-time events get memorialized as well as career accomplishments? They display balls from one-time events, etc., no?)

Anyway, Bert is a Hall of Famer. To keep him out does not shortchange him or the Minnesota community. Keeping Bert out of the Hall shortchanges generations of future baseball fans from remembering and celebrating his achievements. That's the shame of it.

For kicks, let's take Johan Santana's career totals (5 seasons) and extrapolate those stats to 22 seasons. We get:

810 games pitched, 18 CG (different era, I know), 3766 IP, 3075 H, 1386 ER, 382 HR, 3694 K, 1166 BB, 260 W, 110 L, 3.31 ERA.

We can all agree that Bert's stats are better than Johan's. Each had extenuating circumstances -- Bert played for lousy teams, Johan pitched a few years in relief and pitched for some bad teams. Can we all also agree that if Johan pitches the way he has been for the past 5 years, even winnign 12-15 games a year for a horrible team (hypothetical to prove a point, people) that Johan deserves to be in the Hall?

I thought so.

So, in conclusion, ummm, yeah. Bert should be in the Hall... now if only someone will hear my cries for Mattingly...

YankeeFan

Mike,

While Whitey Ford does deserve to be in the hall, Les Straker could have put up decent numbers playing on the teams that Ford played on.

"I agree, if only because 5 years from now, I hope to be teaching my almost-5 year old about Jack Morris, Orel, Bert, Whitey, and yes, even Clemens. " - YankeeFan

Off-topic, but YF, are you saying you're about to be a father? Congrats if so! (You may have announced this earlier and I missed it).

At any rate, I agree it's ridiculous that Blyleven isn't in the Hall of Fame for all the reasons listed above.

"So, in conclusion, ummm, yeah. Bert should be in the Hall... now if only someone will hear my cries for Mattingly..."

Oh, Donnie Baseball, how I loved thee. Can you get into the HOF for what COULD have been if your body had only allowed you to play for a couple more full seasons? Mattingly would have been a shoo-in if his health had stood the test. It was so hard to see him struggle toward the end of his all-too-short career.

Oh, and about Bert: I don't see how anyone can argue that getting voted in to something like the All-Star game or the Cy Young can be used as prime criteria later for getting voted into something else (HOF) that's supposed to be based on your career performance, not how many subjective honors you were gifted. That's just poor logic.

"That's like saying a student that graduates with a great GPA (and 3.31 ERA over 22 seasons is great, I think we can agree) wasn't a "great" student because they were never Homecoming royalty."

Oh, Snap!

"Les Straker could have put up decent numbers playing on the teams that Ford played on."

Oh, Snap!

"Incidentally, Nolan Ryan never won a Cy Young either."

OH SNAP!

Blyve in Oh-five.

"Incidentally, Nolan Ryan never won a Cy Young either."
Ryan, Nolan - 324 wins, 5714 strike outs, 2 20 win seasons, 8 time all star, lead the league in strike outs a record 11 times and are you ready for the biggest reason why he is in - 7 NO HITTERS.

There are marks that people look at when they judge if a pitcher is a HOFer for those that don't know

300 wins
3000 strike outs
CY Youngs and other awards (ROY, GG, Fireman)
All Star apperences
post season accomplishments
era
20 win seasons
No Hitters/perfect games
winning %
lead the league.

No matter what the player is you can use this formula to figure it out.

Are there players with less then 300 wins, of course, but look at those players winning %.

So for Bert he has the 3k strike outs, a good post season career and good era, threw a no-no, he is missing everything else. Chuck Tanner is not why he isn't in, and because he played for the twins isn't it either, Kirby, Rod, and the Killer made it in

I personally don't think it adds up to a HOF career, and so far neither do the writers. I am not going to keep making an argument here against him so not to become public enemy #1.

Donny Baseball's problem was injuries, had he played 22 season he would have gotten more then enough numbers to make it in the hall, but I understand why he isn't in, the Yankee that should be in that isn't is Goose.

He should absolutely be in. Awards like MVP of this or that, or Cy Young, are truly irrelevant (especially when one sees who has won those things lately - sheesh). They mean nothing. All the numbers that mean anything say Blyleven is unquestionably HOF caliber.

Vote him in.

Oh I left off a pitching mark
300 strike outs for a season. Which Ryan did 7 times and Bert did 0 times.

If Cy Youngs and MVPs mean nothing then why have them at all. Please get a clue they mean alot. Did Johan's Cy Young in 2004 mean nothing ?

YF you did this for Johan
810 games pitched, 18 CG (different era, I know), 3766 IP, 3075 H, 1386 ER, 382 HR, 3694 K, 1166 BB, 260 W, 110 L, 3.31 ERA.

Look at that win loss and also figure in 2-3 more Cys. Think he might throw a no no in there, how many AS games ?
so his plaque would read
260 wins, 3694 strike outs, 3 Cy Young awards 150 games over .500 for what could be the best winning % ever. 7 All Star apperences
Those numbers are a sure thing.

OK MIKE I THINK YOU HAVE MADE YOUR POINT QUITE CLEAR - tho I really don't think you're going to convince any of us why Bert shouldn't be in the HOF.

"In addition, we must take into account subjective accomplishments and the extenuating circumstances leading to Blyleven's failure to reach 300 wins, which would surely have led to his enshrinement long ago."

Well then let's push to get Doc Gooden and Darryl Strawberry into the HOF because the extenuating circumstances of their drug habits effectively kept them from playing to their potential and were it not for the white lines (the kind that don't separate fair from foul territories), they'd probably both still be playing fairly well and racking up HOF-type numbers.

Let's compare Blyleven and Juan Marichal (a notable HOFer who's the winner of sub-300 games):

Marichal (16 seasons)
243-142 (.631)
2.89 ERA
244 CG (that's right- 243 career wins, 244 complete games- talk about not needing a closer!)
3.25 K/BB
9-time all-star (8 of them consecutive)
Out of baseball-reference.com's 10 most similar pitchers, only Mike Mussina and Kevin Brown are not HOFers.

Blyleven (22 seasons)
287-250 (.534)
3.31 ERA
242 CG
2.80 K/BB.
2-time all-star (though the 12-year gap in appearances is cool)
Out of baseball-reference.com's 10 most similar pitchers, only Tommy John and Jim Kaat are not HOFers.

Discuss ;-)

And by the way, the objections around the number of gopher balls he gave up is meaningless too, at least in that it's already accounted for in ERA. If a pitcher gives up 3 HRs a game, and he's got a 3.0 ERA, I want him on the mound for my team.

Not to beat a dead horse here, but my thoughts regarding the Cy/All-Star/MVP issue. Does it really make sense to recognize someone's accomplishments based on whether previous people recognized their accomplishments?

One would hope that while the BBWAA voters are reconsidering the pre-steroid batters who have been hanging around the ballot for years, they'll also take a look at their total failure to find anyone who started a game after 1988 who is Hall worthy other than Nolan Ryan. It's worth considering what some of the veteran pitchers in the early steroid years would have done if not for the new crop of juiced up sluggers coming into the league. Not to mention that the mid 80's also saw the rise of Larussa style bullpen use. Really, all the old measures for judging starting pitchers are out the window and voters need to find someting new.

HOFers after 1988

Clemens, Maddox, Johnson, Glavine, Smoltz, Schilling, Pedro. That's just off the top of my head.

huh - interesting list - I only see two 300 game winners - and I dont see the others getting close -tho if I were betting - I'd say Glavine would come the closest - pointing that out because that seems to be an issue with you about Bert- the lack of the MAGICAL 300 wins.
and schilling - why because of that damn bloody sock -please -if that's the case-then Bert should be in the HOF - HOT FOOT gag was a specialty of his -wasn't it??

WW

How many Cy Youngs and all stars do Johnson, Pedro, Smoltz, and Glavine have ? How many games over 500 are they ? how many 20 win seasons ? How many WS titles ? How many Strike outs ?

You don't have to have 300 wins if you have all of the other stuff and all of these guys have that other stuff you don't think is important like wins and awards.

Schilling is the one that will have the hardest time, but while he will not be close to 300 wins and has 0 cy youngs he also has a NLCS MVP a WS MVP and was a part of the 2004 Red Sox Championship team. Has 4-5 300+ strike out seasons. I don't have all of his numbers in front of me but he will have just enough, and yes if it comes down to it the bloody sock will push him over the top.

JESUS! Settle down I was pointing out something that YOU had issues with - no need to fly off the handle

I think I'm done 'talking' to you now

Dear WW

Just for the record my issues with Bert are 287-250 less then 40 games over 500 a very low winning %, no Cy Youngs, No dominate season where he was cleary the best pitcher, only 2 all star games in 20+ years .

If his win/loss record was 30 games different in each direction then I say he is in, but it isn't. When you combine 287 wins with 250 losses that's not that great.

Mike:
The only reason the '04 AL Cy Young award actually meant something was because the voters got it right. Look at this year, Johan was definitely the best AL pitcher but didn't win because Colon had the most wins. Why did he have more wins? Because he had better offense backing him up. If Johan had that kind of support there is no doubt he would have won more games and also the Cy Young, so this years Cy Young just proves that your argument that every award means a lot is BS. They are mostly just popularity contests, so Bert's awards and All Star appearances, or lack there of, shouldn't hinder his induction into the HOF.

Ahem.

I agree with Mike that All-Star appearances signify something. They signify a great year coupled with popularity. I have no stats in front of me, but I'd be curious to know which pitchers made the All-Star team the years Blyleven didn't.

The individual season awards focus on the microcosm that is a baseball season, and take into account so many objective and subjective factors -- real numbers, team performance, popularity with writers (and now fans), dramatic individual and team storylines -- that make them less meaningful when judging a career.

What astounds me about Blyleven is that he kept up his pace for 22 years. Most guys would count themselves lucky to pitch as well as he did for five years. Blyleven's career is worthy of the HOF, even if his individual seasons weren't worthy of All-Star appearances according to the writers those particular years.

Wins? Come on, that has as much to do with the other eight guys on the field as it does the pitcher, not to mention managerial decisions.

Stats that help us judge a career (ERA, strikeouts, Ks to BBs ratio, others) are what we should look at to judge the individual. And Bert was not only good, he was one of the best all time when you consider the thousands of pitchers that have played in the past 100+ years.

Dear Drew

Whether you agree or not wins are the most important stat. As I said earlier Steve Carlton found a way to win 27 games on a team that only won 59 games.'Nough said.

mike

Mike,

You're probably right -- wins might be the most important stat to the voters. I just think it shouldn't be.

If a HOF caliber pitcher has a great ERA, tons of Ks, etc, he'll probably win darn near 300 games over a career. If he doesn't have 300 wins, I think the voters should consider that wins are the result of great pitching plus several other factors.

We see it every year -- players pitching out of their minds can't win a game (happened to Randy Johnson a few years ago, happened to Johan last year) and guys with a 5.5 ERA have 10 wins by the break.

That's why I humbly think the voters should place more weight on stats that more accurately reflect the individuals' performance. ERA adjusts for errors which can certainly lose a game. Strikeouts convey a pitcher's dominance in one-on-one matchups.

Andy

Dear Drew

If SOs show a pitchers dominance in 1on1 matchups, what do HRs show in 1on1 matchups, cause Berty gave up a ton of dingers

mike

Mike,

Do you think wins should be the most important factor?

Drew

Mike,

Good point.

Uh-oh.

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news;_ylt=AuWNNiSYETF9kCOSfo9SvO0RvLYF?slug=ap-whitesox-konerko&prov=ap&type=lgns

I think wins and even more so winning % show you how good a pitcher truly is. Yes there are some great pitchers with low % but even guys on bad teams should be able to win alot more then lose.

Ok Mike. It's one thing to agree...or disagree...or to present your point of view...but when you represent 25%+ of the posts in a 50-comment topic, sometimes posting back-to-back, and saying the same things over and over...it's approaching time-to-start-your-own-blog territory.

Your opinion is just as important and valid as everyone else's, but it's no more so. The impact of your core statement is all but lost in the argumentative repetition.

To quote you: "'Nough said."

I just think that it might not be fair to have "wins" be the most important factor in a pitcher going into the HOF.

There are alot of things that a pitcher has no control of that determine if he gets a win or not. Shouldn't they look at the stats that reflect just the pitchers performance more?

Just a thought.

Mike, I actually appreciate that you post another opinion, especially in the face of opposition. Wouldn't be very interesting if every post said, "in", "in","in","in",...

That said, you're "wrong", "wrong", "wrong", ...
:)

Regarding the "does it make sense to evaluate based on past evaluations" question from a while back, I'd say know, if you think that everything can be captured in a stats page. Although I think a lot can, and it's the reason for which I think Bert should be a shoo-in, I'd say it's overstating the case. There's times when a home run, given the context of the game, is a HOME RUN, and that doesn't show up in the stats.

Whoops. Meant to say: "... I'd say no ...."

WOW--this thread is long--lots of good arguments as to why Bert should be in the HOF. As I said yesterday on other thread--Bert belongs in HOF--said by other team announcers that I hear doing Twins games on MLB Extra Innings. I forgot the BIG one--Jim Palmer (HOF pitcher) who does some Os games. He called it a crime that Bert isnt in. Also worth noting--Palmer has 29 fewer wins than Bert; fewer Ks (only rocket, unit, ryan, carlton and w. johnson have more than Burt) fewer shutouts.. As I said Don Sutton's son who does Brewer games also called it a crime that Bert isnt in HOF.

Here is a list of HOF pitchers with fewer wins than Bert--Robin Roberts, Fergie Jenkins, Palmer, Feller, Koufax, Gibson, Marichal, Hubbell, Catfish, Ford, Bunning, Dizzy Dean, etc. All have fewer Ks and most have fewer shutouts. How many of them pitched in NY or LA. I admit Dizzy and Koufax had arm troubles that kept down number of wins--but Bert won 100 more than each of them. He also won 100 more than either Orel or Doc who are this years hottest candidates.

Time to vote Bert in was a few years ago. He definitely should have been voted in before Gary Carter!!!

Someone once said that, in addition to all the normal, unofficial career-achievements standards that they have for getting into the Hall, they should reserve a place for everyone that did something better than anyone else. For instance, the greatest basestealer of all time, or the greatest outfield arm.

I think that that's part of what got Nolan in so easily. Clearly deserving, but with a winning % of 52.6% and his walks, he didn't deserve to waltz in with one of the highest vote totals ever. But, he had perhaps the most dangerous fastball of all time.

If that's the case, it's another mark in Bert's favor: greatest curveball ever.

"If SOs show a pitchers dominance in 1on1 matchups, what do HRs show in 1on1 matchups, cause Berty gave up a ton of dingers"

Bert surrendered 24 HRs or fewer in all but two seasons in his 22-year career. His career HRs per 9 innings was 0.78. Not exactly "a ton of dingers." As you have pointed out, he gave up a whopping 50 HRs in 1986 and he surrendered 46 HRs in 1987, but his ERA in both of those years was still only 4.01. He pitched 271-2/3 innings and 267.0 innings in 1986 and 1987, respectively.

And despite Steve Carlton's phenomenal year in 1972, when he had a 1.97 ERA, wins are still the most overrated stat for a starting pitcher when measuring his individual performance.

Twins Fan Mike

So, to sum up:

Everyone posting here except Mike thinks Bert should be in the HOF.

So let's take all this energy and refocus it where it belongs, namely getting the Veteran's Committee to finally vote Tony Oliva in!!!!

Dear Chris,

Perhaps the reason for the extra B in BBWAA is so that it doesn't spell "BWAA," which, as we all know, is the first syllable of a maniacal laugh (bwaa-hahaha).

Regards,
Annun

With you all the way, HG. Already got my signs made up and duct-taped to broomsticks. When do we march on Cooperstown?

I second that motion - haroldguy!
Side note - on the ocassions my parents attend Wolves games - they have sat next to Tony O and his wife - my mom says he is always so kind - and just funny! She always tells him he should be in the HOF and he just says -Oh what can you do?? And smiles.
He sang the Chiquita(sp) banana song to me once -that alone should have gotten him into the HOF =)

Much love
Wonder Woman

May we add Roger Maris to the guys that need to get in the Hall? Tony O. and Maris in '05?

(If Schilling gets in for his '04 WS MVP/Bloody ankle, Morris gets in for '91 WS MVP/Game Seven. Fair is fair.)

Dear Just Beth

I agree That Jack Morris should be in, and not just because of '91, although that to me puts him over the top. a 3 time 20 game winner, 5 time all star a WS MVP and a respectable winning % .577 254-186 and an awesome big game picher, his era of 3.90 is what is keeping him out. This is a guy I would love to have on the mound in a big spot.

mike

HG--agree that Tony O also belongs in hall--Joe Morgan said so last year--but cant get in till 2006--since Vets Committee (including Morgan and Palmer) only gets to vote every other year. So save the march for a year when it may do some good.

I think all of these guys are basically suffering from the same affliction. They played in the relative obscurity of the midwest and/or had frequent adversarial relationships with the media (aka "Base Ball Writers").

If you spent your career in the midwest (possibly with the exception of playing for the Cubs), you've got an uphill battle unless your "basic" stats (Wins, ERA, HRs, BA) were SO impressive that you simply could not be ignored. Then, you've got a shot at getting elected within the first couple of years of eligibility.

But if not, forget it. The longer you go without being elected, the less your chances are of getting the votes. The writers focus their attention and votes on the "flavors of the week"... the guys who are just now becoming eligible. Blyleven, Morris, Oliva, even Maris... they're chances of getting in become less each year because the current voters (a) don't remember them, (b) didn't "like" them when they played, or (c) are just too lazy (or stupid) to go back and look at any stats deeper or more meaningful than career W, ERA, HR and BA for anyone over the age of 40.

The problem, my friends, is that for some totally inexplicable reason, the baseball gods have entrusted the decision as to who belongs in its holiest shrine to Base Ball Writers, no doubt the least intelligent and most biased people in any way affiliated with the game.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/leaders/HRA_career.shtml

That list doesn't seem so bad IMHO

Dearest Batgirl,

Oh to have the power you wield, to stop, or at least considerably slow, an escalating portion of the discussion/argument to a dull roar with a simple "Ahem"...

In awe of you as always,

bubblemint

bubblemint, Blyleven was my first crush too, but it was in 1987. First baseball boyfriend!

Every television announcer for an opposing team insists that Bert belongs in the HOF. I may be biased, but I agree!

When I was a kid my mom and I once saw Blyleven pull up to a Tom Thumb in Bloomington in his big Suburban-like pre-SUV. His license plate?

BLY 11

I got him to circle me in Boston by holding up a sign with a representation of that plate!

Also - regarding twink's most recent post - I think my first true baseball boyfriend (ahem... NSMC) was Brian Harper.

To completely beat Mr. Ed senseless on this one, I agree with the sentiment behind mike's statement, reprinted below for convenience:

"Just for the record my issues with Bert are 287-250 less then 40 games over 500 a very low winning %, no Cy Youngs, No dominate season where he was cleary the best pitcher, only 2 all star games in 20+ years .

If his win/loss record was 30 games different in each direction then I say he is in, but it isn't. When you combine 287 wins with 250 losses that's not that great."

That is the sticking point in my craw as well, but here's how I get around it. Bert had over 200 complete games. I have to think that a certain amount of his losses came during those complete games where, by today's standards, a reliever would have come in and either gotten him the win or taken the "L" from him.

Just something to think about.

YF

P.S. Sorry to disappoint you all, but there will be a new Yankee fan in the world sometime towards the end of February. We're thinking of calling the child "Pitchers and Catchers Report" but think it may get teased.

Dear readers,

Batgirl noticed a certain handsome man one day because he had "Bert Blyleven eyes." Reader, I married him!

Sincerely,
BG

Let me start by saying that I think some folks are giving Mike a bit of a bum rap- comments to the effect that he's starting to get into "start-your-own-blog" territory just because he's posting a lot on this thread are a little over-the-top. When he posts something new, it's a strong, thought-out argument. When he repeats something, it's a direct response to another Batling's comments to him, not because he's trying to hijack the thread, much less the entire blog. Mike may occasionally make his typical-for-a-Yankee-fan jokes about having your star players playing in the Bronx in a few years but realisically, he's a fan of the game, he's a knowledgeable guy and I think he makes for good discussion on the threads on which he posts.

Enough about Mike, except to say that he's not alone- I, too, am on the fence at best about Bert's HOF-worthiness and agree that while he was a very good pitcher for a very good, respectable career, he was not really a *great* pitcher.

According to Chris's original plea that kicked this whole thing off, Bert's got a lot of intangibles. That's all good and fine and I'm sure that'll get him into a lot of people's Boyfriend Hall of Fame but making a case for voting him into the HOF because of a nasty curveball is like saying Mark Wohlers belongs in because he could throw a 103-mph fastball that made guys wish that when they swung and missed, their parents weren't watching.

Moving on to the measurable, many have argued that the "magic number" of 300 wins is questionable because it depends on the run support you get and the defense behind you and yadda yadda yadda. Well, many of the starting pitchers already enshrined are well short of that win total. And often, these are guys whose careers were shorter than Bert's by 5 years or more. Tying that into one of Chris' points: "242 Complete games. No bull. We could really stop right here." You *could* but you'd be making a poor case. I looked at the HOF pitchers from the same general era (names like Carlton, Jenkins, Marichal, Gibson, Perry, Niekro) who had more than 242 CG and even those who won fewer games than Bert ALL posted higher percentages.

As for the "Magic #300", 300 wins / Bert's 22 years = 13.64 wins/year. For a HOF-quality pitcher, even with a relatively crappy team behind him, averaging just over 13.6 wins a year should not be a challenge. A "good" pitcher might not make it but a "great" pitcher will pretty surely find a way.

I know, I know, winning also depends on the other 8 guys... so that means you can't really use the argument about his career shutouts stat to lobby for Bert's bronze plaque. Sure, it's impressive that he racked up 60 shutouts but it also owes something to the collective performance of the other defenders.

B-R lists Bert's "most similar by age" for almost his entire career as Don Drysdale and Don Sutton (both HOFers).

Let's compare:

BB: .534 winning percentage; DD: .557; DS: .559

Close, but he doesn't stack up. What difference do .020 percentage points make? 2003 AL Central Champion Minnesota Twins: .556; 2003 AL Central runner-up Chicago White Sox: .531. One goes to the postseason, the other stays home; one goes to Cooperstown, the other... we'll see. (I'm done talking about winning, I promise ;-))

BB: 3.31 ERA; DD: 2.95; DS: 3.26

Decent but still the worst of the three.

BB: .745 K/IP; DD: .724; DS: .677
BB: .932 Hits/IP; DD: .899; DS: .888

Decent job on the strikeouts per inning but kinda weak on the H/IP- when I'm looking at pitchers for a fantasy team, I'm looking for guys with more K than IP and more IP than hits allowed and if I have a HOF vote, I'm definitely applying those same criteria to a candidate.

BB: 2.80 K/BB; DD: 2.91; DS: 2.66

So about average among the "most similar", which pretty much sums up the argument for Bert's enshrinement...

...until you look at total Ks. Even if every voting writer looks Bert up and down and front to back with a microscope and they're still on the fence, they should look at his strikeout tally one last time. You can argue either way on pretty much every other issue but when it comes to Ks, Bert's not great; he's not even very good.

He's elite.

Bert in '05. ;-)

Congratulations, YankeeFan!

You sure there's no chance of the little one liking the Mets instead? ;-)

Only if the wee one is raised properly, LGM... :biggest wink possible:

I think I understand what he is trying to say.

People here are saying that Bert's losses should not be held against him because he pitched on bad teams which I don't understand since he won a couple of world series but if pitchers like Lefty could find ways to win on bad teams, why couldn't Bert ?

I think the reason why Steve Carlton is in the hall of fame and Bert isn't is because Carlton was just better then Bert and I think you could say the same for all of the pitchers in the hall.

Can anyone name one pitcher that is in the Hall that you would pick Bert over ? I can't think of any.

I'm not familiar with every single pitcher in the Hall of Fame, but one of them has to be the worst -- so why shouldn't it be Bert? ;-)

I think this dead horse has been beaten to dust but I will add one last thought and then retire.

If wins are the thing, then here is a list of all the pitchers who were better than Roger Clemens last year:

D Willis, FLA ; C Carpenter, STL; R Oswalt, HOU; C Capuano, MIL; J Lieber, PHI; A Pettitte, HOU; M Mulder, STL; J Suppan, STL; J Beckett, FLA; L Hernandez, WSH; P Martinez, NYM; J Francis, COL; T Hudson, ATL; M Morris, STL; J Smoltz, ATL; J Weaver, LAD; B Webb, ARI; C Zambrano, CHC

It's just a shame that the Rocket couldn't figure out some way to win regardless of what his team did -- with a little more effort I'm sure he could have been at least as good a pitcher as Chris Capuano or Jeff Francis.

Heraldguy- keep the faith... and click my name ;-)

Wordsmith- Sass is always appreciated (especially around these parts) but you're talking about one season in which he couldn't find ways to win, not a 22-year career.

You want to compare Bert and Roger to see the difference between someone who may squeak into the HOF and someone who's a lock? Look at their regular-season performances while on teams that played in October:

The three times Bert was on a team that went to the postseason, he never managed a regular-season ERA under 3.18 and had records of 10-9, 12-5, 15-12. Gets the job done but hardly HOF material.

Clemens, on the other hand, helped his team to the postseason 11 times. Of those 11, his ERA was under 3.00 five times (and under 2.00 twice; 1.93 with the 1990 Red Sox and 1.87 with the 2005 Astros). (Curiously, five of the six times he posted ERAs above 3.00 were the five seasons he played for the Yankees, but a- the Yankees are consistent statistical anomalies and b- who gives a mouse's fart about them anyway? ;-)) His records during those seasons are freakish (the best of them were 24-4, 21-6, 20-3-- only half of the six seasons in which he won 20 or more; incidentally, the only year Bert ever won 20 games, he also lost 17).

(I must say it pains me to say nice things about Clemens, though in his defense, a friend of mine has met him several times and swears he's one of the nicest guys you'd ever want to meet).

Point is, you compare Bert to other current and future HOFers and he hardly stacks up. His only prayer is being #5 on the all-time strikeout list, which, in my opinion, should count for a lot. Despite being otherwise borderline, he'd get my vote if I had one. To paraphrase you, Wordsmith, someone's got to be the worst of the best. And Bert's a much better choice than Morris.