tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-767390557684041599.post3878347555283863655..comments2022-11-01T02:01:13.473-07:00Comments on Words Above Replacement: Why Ex-Tiger Jack Morris Should Not Be a Hall of FamerSean Gagnierhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08286292918601553408noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-767390557684041599.post-37807021938487798712013-01-06T18:46:40.179-08:002013-01-06T18:46:40.179-08:00Thanks for catching the SABR thing, that was a typ...Thanks for catching the SABR thing, that was a typo on my part. The SABR community, like you brought up, do not want Morris in. While I would love to see another Tiger in the Hall of Fame, I can't see it with his numbers. But if he is voted in, I will be happy for him.<br /><br />Smith was dominating, he held the MLB saves record, of 478, until Trevor Hoffman passed him en route to his 601. When Smith came out of the 'pen it was game over. Not to mention Smith limited batters to hitting .237 against him. I don't see how there can be a Hall of Fame without one of the top three closers of all time.Sean Gagnierhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08286292918601553408noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-767390557684041599.post-25064176401765935372013-01-06T18:40:48.045-08:002013-01-06T18:40:48.045-08:00Lolich's ERA and ERA+ are both better than tha...Lolich's ERA and ERA+ are both better than that of Morris, it becomes glaring in the playoffs. <br /><br />While I agree with you that Morris was indeed consistent throughout his career, I would add that he was consistently average statistically speaking. Like you said, there was never a standout year or stretch of dominance. While Morris did get wins and was the ace of several teams, he was by no means a slam dunk candidate, he is a fringe candidate, that I believe to be an average player the caliber of Lolich. And Lolich was never inducted into Cooperstown.Sean Gagnierhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08286292918601553408noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-767390557684041599.post-91204667240694954102013-01-06T14:42:18.151-08:002013-01-06T14:42:18.151-08:00Also, Lee Smith faced about 5,300 batters in his c...Also, Lee Smith faced about 5,300 batters in his career. Jack Morris faced more than 16,000. It's a curious argument to say Smith belongs in the Hall of Fame and Morris doesn't. Few people who saw Smith pitch thought he was the best of his era. Not really even close. Closers pitch so little, they need to be really dominant.<br /><br />Oh, one more thing on Morris: it seems you are saying SABRmetrics has HELPED Morris's argument for the Hall, that the numbers have been in his favor. It's been the opposite. SABR guys don't want Morris in, pretty overwhelmingly. The writers have, over time, started to support Morris becuase (IMO) they realize there are no starting pitchers who were in their prime in the 1980s who are in the Hall. It's a a glaring omission.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-767390557684041599.post-717435880902054572013-01-06T14:38:18.222-08:002013-01-06T14:38:18.222-08:00Interesting. You say Lolich's ERA was "no...Interesting. You say Lolich's ERA was "not good" but better than Morris's. Then you admit Morris had an ERA+ of 105 compared to the 104 of Mickey. <br /><br />Also, I take issue with this line: "Yes, Morris had a fantastic Game 7 in 1991, but that does not make someone a Hall of Famer. Consistent solid numbers do, and Morris does not have that."<br /><br />Really? I would say the strength of the argument FOR Morris is that he was consistently solid. He was not spectacular for any one season, which hurts him. He never had the 3-4 year stretch where he was clearly in his prime. Instead he was a steady, consistent pitcher for close to 15 years. He started at least 34 games in 11 of 13 straight seasons (one year he didn't was a strike and he led the league in wins that year). That's pretty amazing. If he was anything, he was consistently solid. But if you watched him pitch (and I probably saw 90% of his starts for the Tigers in his career), he always had 5-6 starts a year where he got smacked around, which would push his ERA up. He wasn't going out there start after start giving up four runs, he was putting up a lot of complete game 5-hitters where he gave up 1-3 runs too. He was an ace. He took the ball and he finished what he started. His ERA was higher than others in other eras? So what? There's a reason he started Game One of the WS for three teams, and was the ace of three WS title teams. The guy was a stud. Was he Jim Palmer or Tom Seaver or Greg Maddux? No. But he was as good a pitcher as Catfish Hunter and nearly as good as Don Sutton and others from a previous generation who got into the Hall.<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com