• A Hall Without Jack Morris Is No Hall at All

    On Wednesday afternoon, it was announced that the Baseball Writers Association of America (BBWAA) elected Greg Maddux, Tom Glavine and Frank Thomas into the Baseball Hall of Fame as the Class of 2014. While each of the candidates were worthy of election (as each were some of the most dominant players of their own or any other era in baseball), there remains a glaring omission from the class that should offend baseball historians and fans of all ages. That omission has nothing to do with the PED era. Instead, I refer to St. Paul, Minnesota native Jack Morris.

    Morris has garnered a lot of attention over the past few years regarding his candidacy for baseball’s Hall of Fame. Most recently, Morris’ attention has stemmed from his inability to get elected to the Hall in his final year on the ballot. The argument presents many conflicting points.

    On one hand, had Morris been elected, his ERA (3.90) would have been the highest ERA ever allowed in the Hall of Fame, ousting Red Ruffing’s career 3.80 ERA. According to Sports Illustrated’s Tom Verducci, Morris also gave up so many hits and runs that he never finished among the top four in his league in ERA or WAR and only once did so for WHIP.

    On the other hand, over his 18-year career, Morris compiled a 254-186 record over 549 games—527 of which were starts—which places him 43rd on the all-time wins list. For comparison, Ruffing (whose aforementioned 3.80 ERA is the highest among Hall of Fame pitchers) had a career 273-225 record over 624 games—536 of which were starts—and he was elected into the Hall of Fame. As it currently stands, one of the 50 winningest pitchers of all-time will not be in the Hall of Fame and if you consider the thousands of pitchers who have pitched throughout the game’s history (some good, some bad), leaving out one of the top 50 (based on wins alone) is questionable. Morris was only 19 wins behind Ruffing, started 9 fewer games, had a 0.10 higher ERA than he did, and pitched in an era with a designated hitter; yet, Ruffing is in the Hall and Morris is not. At the very least, Morris requires serious consideration.

    Within his era, he further shines. According to Verducci, from 1979-1992, Morris threw 18% more innings than any other starting pitcher and made it through the 8th inning in his starts 45% more often than any other pitcher. In an era where five men rotations were becoming more common and pitchers weren't being asked to pitch more than six innings very often, Morris’ accomplishments during his career represent a dying breed of pitchers who pitched deeper into games on a more regular basis and accumulated more innings over the duration of their careers.

    More impressive, he accomplished this all while pitching in the American League with a designated hitter in every lineup. Among all starting pitchers who debuted between 1970 and 1984, Morris won the most games (254), completed the most games by far (175, or 22 percent more than the next closest pitcher), posted the second best winning percentage (.577) and had the second most strikeouts (2,478) (Verducci). Those stats, however, do not give justice to the complete profile that Morris has assembled over his illustrious career.

    Morris made 14 Opening Day starts, six Game One playoff starts (of which he went 4-2), one unforgettable Game 7 start in 1991, was selected to five All-Star teams, and finished in the top five for Cy Young Award voting five times in his career. Although Morris only had three seasons of 20 or more wins, his perception as a staff ace and bulldog on the mound garnered him a reputation around the game as one of the most durable and productive pitchers of his era. In a culture in which a player is equally judged by the number of championships they won as they are by their individual achievements, Morris’ playoff resume is equally impressive. Morris won three World Series titles and sported a career 7-4 record with a 3.80 ERA in the playoffs and a 4-2 record with a 2.96 ERA in the World Series. These statistics reflect a pitcher who excelled on the biggest stage where players careers are often judged most critically.

    No pitcher has ever pitched their entire career in the American League during the designated hitter era and been elected into the Hall of Fame. Shouldn’t Morris be the first? Sure you can point to his high ERA and his lower win total compared to other Hall of Fame pitchers, but that shouldn’t deter voters from electing Morris into the Hall of Fame. The Hall of Fame is made for players who left an impact on the game of baseball and were among the elite players of their era.

    Morris fits the bill for both of those characteristics. His 10 inning masterpiece in Game 7 of the 1991 World Series has gone down as one of the greatest outings in Major League history and his statistics rank among the best pitchers from the era that he came from.

    A lot of the skepticism surrounding Morris’ candidacy is related to the lack of quality pitchers coming out of the era in which he pitched in. Despite the lack of elite pitching talent during this era compared to other eras in history, Morris shouldn’t be punished for pitching at the time that he did. The fact of the matter is this: Morris was one of the elite pitchers of his time and thus, he should be recognized for it.

    When Kirby Puckett was elected to the Hall of Fame in 2001, there was little arguing among baseball minds that Puckett deserved to be in the Hall of Fame. I would tend to argue that Puckett was one of the greatest players who ever lived. He dominated the era that he was in and gave several lasting memories that will stand in baseball history forever.

    However, if you look at his stats and judge Puckett solely by those stats, one could argue that Puckett’s stats aren’t completely “Hall of Fame worthy” by comparison to other players already in the Hall. Puckett may have been a 10-time All-Star, 6-time Gold Glove Award winner, and 5-time Silver Slugger Award with career totals of a .318 batting average with 2,304 hits, 207 HR and 1,085 RBI over his 12-year career, but those statistics don’t rank among the game’s elite. At the time of his election in 2001, Puckett ranked 24th in career batting average, 47th in career on base percentage, 50th in runs, 25th in home runs, and 34th in RBIs out of the 59 total outfielders in the Hall of Fame. Since Puckett’s numbers ranked among the middle to lower end of the spectrum when compared to all of the outfielders in the Hall of Fame, does that mean he shouldn’t be in the Hall? No way.

    Puckett was judged by so much more than simply his statistics. His legacy had just as much to do with him getting in the Hall as his play on the field did. What created and solidified Puckett’s legacy among the game’s greats were his performances on the biggest stage, the World Series. His infamous catch and walk-off homerun in Game 6 of the 1991 World Series is firmly implanted in the minds of baseball historians and fans forever and it undoubtedly had an impact on how the voters perceived Puckett when his “Hall of Fame Judgment Day” came in 2001. With that in mind, why shouldn’t Morris’ strong performances in the World Series (i.e. Game 7 of 1991) hold the same kind of impact on his candidacy?

    If you rank Morris statistically among some of the pitchers already in the Hall of Fame, his rankings might be similar in comparison to that of Puckett’s and the rest of the Hall of Fame outfielders, but does that make him any more or less worthy of election? The answer to that question is no. While some of the statistical categories clearly show that Puckett is Hall of Fame worthy and ranks among the game’s best to ever play the position, others rank him among the bottom of the group when it comes to particular statistics; however, Puckett was still elected to the Hall and so should Morris.

    Morris' timing isn't doing him any favors. Puckett was elected in 2001 when there weren’t as many viable candidates jockeying for position as there are in 2014 when Morris is trying to get in. Morris had to compete for votes with PED era holdovers and stalwarts such as Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens, Mark McGwire and Sammy Sosa whereas Puckett had to compete with Gary Carter, Morris, Goose Gossage, Jim Rice, and Bruce Sutter for votes. Although many of the players Puckett had to compete with for votes eventually were elected into the Hall, the situation and voting attitude is much different now than it was back then. Voter’s opinions are more diversified now than ever before and it has resulted in a declining number of players getting elected each year.

    If the Hall of Fame is truly the sacred place that the BBWAA is trying to uphold and build upon by adding the greatest players in baseball history—while keeping out the players who tarnish the game’s integrity—then Morris deserves to be a part of it. If you look at his complete body of work considering his statistics, reputation, and performance during his specific era, he will remain among the best pitchers who ever played the game.

    Sadly, it seems as if the BBWAA has their own hidden agendas behind their voting that may stem from personal experiences or perceptions of the players instead of their performance on the field. These hidden agendas are costing players like Morris—who deserve to be in the Hall—a chance to be recognized for the greatness of their careers. I shudder at the thought of who else may be left out because of such nonsensical reasoning.

    By not electing Morris in his last year of eligibility, the BBWAA hasn’t upheld their duty to elect the best players into baseball’s most sacred place. Should the system be changed? I’m not sure; but if you ask me, a Hall without Jack Morris is no Hall at all.





    Photo Courtesy of Rick Stewart-Getty Images

    This article was originally published in blog: A Hall Without Jack Morris is No Hall at All started by bwille
    Comments 127 Comments
    1. Willihammer's Avatar
      Willihammer -
      Really, if you want to use WAR as your guiedeline (or any other metric), any question of "does a guy belong in the Hall" can be reduced to a simple baseball-reference lookup.

      Someone with a B-R subscription, do a pitching season finder (combined seasons or careeers) for the following:

      Years 1957-2013
      Min. 1000 IP.

      Jack pitched (1977-1994). Any 17 year period, on average, will capture all or part of 22 HoF pitchers. Does WAR say Jack one of the 22 best to have pitched at some point in this timeframe? (I am too lazy/cheap to look for myself).
    1. old nurse's Avatar
      old nurse -
      Not to be terribly nit picky but Carlton was pretty much done by 1984. The Jack Morris era was 1979-1994. In that era by fwar, all that are above him are in the HOF. Gooden may have been a better pitcher but his career lasted just long enough to be qualified to be in the hall but not enough to accumulate fwar to match Morris . The list of position players with more fwar than Morriss and not in the HOF is a lot longer. Morris was a top 6 pitcher for his era. It has more to do with there were not that many elite pitchers in that same span.
    1. Brad Swanson's Avatar
      Brad Swanson -
      Quote Originally Posted by Willihammer View Post
      Really, if you want to use WAR as your guiedeline (or any other metric), any question of "does a guy belong in the Hall" can be reduced to a simple baseball-reference lookup.

      Someone with a B-R subscription, do a pitching season finder (combined seasons or careeers) for the following:

      Years 1957-2013
      Min. 1000 IP.

      Jack pitched (1977-1994). Any 17 year period, on average, will capture all or part of 22 HoF pitchers. Does WAR say Jack one of the 22 best to have pitched at some point in this timeframe? (I am too lazy/cheap to look for myself).
      http://bbref.com/pi/shareit/O8LXQ

      Morris is 62nd, right below Bartolo Colon and right above Bob Welch.
    1. Hosken Bombo Disco's Avatar
      Hosken Bombo Disco -
      Quick Quiz...

      Name:____________________

      1. T or F: Ozzie Smith is in the Hall of Fame.

      2. T or F: In all time batting average for shortstops, Ozzie Smith rates somewhere between Trevor Plouffe and Jason Bartlett.

      3. T or F: In all time fielding percentage for shortstops, Ozzie Smith rates somewhere between David Eckstein and Stephen Drew.

      How'd you do!?
    1. Thrylos's Avatar
      Thrylos -
      Quote Originally Posted by Hosken Bombo Disco View Post
      Quick Quiz...

      Name:____________________

      1. T or F: Ozzie Smith is in the Hall of Fame.

      2. T or F: In all time batting average for shortstops, Ozzie Smith rates somewhere between Trevor Plouffe and Jason Bartlett.

      3. T or F: In all time fielding percentage for shortstops, Ozzie Smith rates somewhere between David Eckstein and Stephen Drew.

      How'd you do!?
      Wrong questions

      T or F: Ozzie Smith ranks first among short stops in WAR (which takes account both offense and defense).

      That's why he is and should be in the HOF.
    1. Willihammer's Avatar
      Willihammer -
      There were 124 pitchers who threw min. 1000 IP and whose careers partially or totally are captured in the years 1977-1994. They are

      Row Labels Sum of WAR
      Roger Clemens 139.2
      Tom Seaver 106.1
      Greg Maddux 104.8
      Randy Johnson 104.1
      Phil Niekro 97.3
      Bert Blyleven 96.4
      Gaylord Perry 93.6
      Pedro Martinez 85.9
      Steve Carlton 84
      Nolan Ryan 83.7
      Fergie Jenkins 82.7
      Mike Mussina 82.7
      Curt Schilling 80.7
      Tom Glavine 74
      Don Sutton 68.8
      Kevin Brown 68.7
      Rick Reuschel 68.2
      Jim Palmer 67.9
      John Smoltz 66.6
      Luis Tiant 65.9
      Tommy John 62.2
      David Cone 61.8
      Bret Saberhagen 59.2
      Chuck Finley 58.4
      Frank Tanana 57.6
      Jerry Koosman 57.2
      Dave Stieb 56.8
      Kevin Appier 55
      David Wells 53.5
      Wilbur Wood 52.3
      Orel Hershiser 51.7
      Kenny Rogers 51.1
      Jamie Moyer 50.3
      Mark Langston 50.2
      Jimmy Key 49.4
      Mickey Lolich 48.9
      Dwight Gooden 48
      Ron Guidry 47.9
      Frank Viola 47.3
      Steve Rogers 45.4
      Jim Kaat 45.4
      Vida Blue 45.1
      Jack Morris 43.9
      Bob Welch 43.6
      Al Leiter 42.7
      Tom Candiotti 42.6
      Rich Gossage 41.9
      Danny Darwin 40.6
      John Candelaria 40.1
      Charlie Hough 39.3
      Jon Matlack 39
      Mark Gubicza 37.6
      Andy Messersmith 37.4
      Fernando Valenzuela 37.3
      Burt Hooton 36.5
      Catfish Hunter 36.5
      Jose Rijo 35
      Tom Gordon 35
      Bruce Hurst 35
      Doyle Alexander 34.8
      Larry Dierker 34.4
      John Tudor 34.3
      Tim Wakefield 34.3
      Charlie Leibrandt 34.3
      Pat Hentgen 33
      Jerry Reuss 32.8
      Rick Wise 32
      Mike Boddicker 31.7
      Andy Benes 31.4
      John Hiller 31.4
      Sid Fernandez 31.3
      Rick Sutcliffe 31.2
      John Denny 31.1
      Teddy Higuera 30.7
      Jim Barr 30.6
      Greg Swindell 30.3
      Rick Rhoden 30.1
      Scott Sanderson 29.7
      Lee Smith 29.5
      Mike Cuellar 29.5
      Kevin Tapani 29.2
      Mike Morgan 29
      Joe Niekro 28.6
      Pedro Astacio 28.5
      Mike Moore 28.2
      Trevor Hoffman 28.2
      Jack McDowell 27.9
      Alex Fernandez 27.8
      Doug Drabek 27.7
      Woody Williams 27.7
      Ken Forsch 27.1
      Ken Holtzman 27.1
      Mario Soto 26.8
      Tim Belcher 26.8
      Floyd Bannister 26.4
      Dennis Leonard 26.3
      Dave Stewart 26.2
      Kevin Gross 26.2
      Ramon Martinez 26.1
      Kent Tekulve 26.1
      Mike Flanagan 26
      Gary Nolan 25.8
      Jon Lieber 25.5
      Jeff Fassero 25.2
      Joe Coleman 25.1
      Charles Nagy 25.1
      Rollie Fingers 25.1
      Ron Reed 25.1
      Wilson Alvarez 25
      Dan Quisenberry 24.8
      Scott Erickson 24.8
      Steve Trachsel 24.8
      Juan Guzman 24.7
      Chris Bosio 24.6
      Bob Ojeda 24.6
      Ismael Valdez 24.5
      Bruce Sutter 24.5
      Mike Torrez 24.1
      Stan Bahnsen 24
      Mike Scott 23.9
      Bill Gullickson 23.9
      Bob Stanley 23.9
      John Franco 23.5
      Dave Goltz 23.4
      There's Morris at 43.
    1. Brock Beauchamp's Avatar
      Brock Beauchamp -
      Quote Originally Posted by Hosken Bombo Disco View Post
      Quick Quiz...

      Name:____________________

      1. T or F: Ozzie Smith is in the Hall of Fame.

      2. T or F: In all time batting average for shortstops, Ozzie Smith rates somewhere between Trevor Plouffe and Jason Bartlett.

      3. T or F: In all time fielding percentage for shortstops, Ozzie Smith rates somewhere between David Eckstein and Stephen Drew.

      How'd you do!?
      Reggie Jackson had the same batting average as Ozzie Smith.

      Obviously, we should keep him out of the Hall for that.
    1. ashburyjohn's Avatar
      ashburyjohn -
      Quote Originally Posted by Brock Beauchamp View Post
      Reggie Jackson had the same batting average as Ozzie Smith.

      Obviously, we should keep him out of the Hall for that.
      His BA was better than Koufax's though. I vote to keep him in.
    1. Hosken Bombo Disco's Avatar
      Hosken Bombo Disco -
      Quote Originally Posted by Thrylos View Post
      Wrong questions

      T or F: Ozzie Smith ranks first among short stops in WAR (which takes account both offense and defense).

      That's why he is and should be in the HOF.
      Oh this is the Hall of Sabermetrics thread?-- I thought we were in the Hall of Fame thread *face palm*

      Seriously I do agree that Morris's numbers fall short. The great Detroit teams with Sparky, Gibson, Trammel, Whitaker, the ace of those great teams was Morris. Hands down. He's kind of the last guy from the by gone era when pitchers pitched complete games on 3 days rest (which would put GMs jobs at stake today) and when DL trips were few and far between. Oh well. There's the 1991 Game 7 display in the HOF so that makes me feel better. Bottom line for me is Morris will be remembered.
    1. bwille's Avatar
      bwille -
      What is being forgotten in this article that I wrote was that my argument for Morris is not solely based on statistics or any Sabermetrics analysis. The reason I used the Puckett comparison is to show that statistics aren't the only reason a player gets elected to the Hall. I do not believe that Puckett's statistics alone got him in the Hall. To me, there has to be more to it than that. That is why I believe that Morris deserved to be in the Hall as well because there are other factors besides his statistics that make him a Hall of Famer in my book. Is there merit in the statistical argument? Absolutely; but to me, statistics are not the sole thing that gets someone elected into the Hall of Fame because if the Hall was solely based on statistics and statistics alone, then the PED users and guys like Pete Rose deserve to be in. Instead, these players are banished because of their behavior or decisions. Morris may have had a bristly personality and it may have turned some people away, but I do not believe that should prevent voters from voting for him. They may have based their decision on Sabermetrics or whatever, but I do not believe that is solely right.

      If you look at pitchers from the early 1900s and you see that they won an astronomical number of games--records that will likely never be broken--with an astounding number of starts and innings and then tried to compare all other pitchers from different eras to that era, nobody would come close to their production. No pitchers would be allowed in because if we judged everyone by the standard set then, everyone would fall short. Players are different now. The game is different now. Should we leave people out from different eras who were the best players of their respective eras even though it statistical doesn't compare well to other eras? I believe the answer to that is no and I'm sorry, but no statistical or Sabermetrical analysis will change that opinion for me.

      At some point, the Hall of Fame needs to take into consideration more than just statistics and I believe, in some aspects, they already do. I argue that if you solely base your justifications on statistics and Sabermetrics, the Hall of Fame's standards are very fluid. The eye test is very subjective, but it still has some weight and if managers like Bobby Cox (one of the greatest of all time) are endorsing Jack Morris, there has to be something there. Does not being in the Hall of Fame mean that Morris had a poor career? No, but I do believe he was worthy of being elected and the fact that he wasn't elected frustrates me.
    1. Brock Beauchamp's Avatar
      Brock Beauchamp -
      Quote Originally Posted by bwille View Post
      The reason I used the Puckett comparison is to show that statistics aren't the only reason a player gets elected to the Hall. I do not believe that Puckett's statistics alone got him in the Hall. To me, there has to be more to it than that. That is why I believe that Morris deserved to be in the Hall as well because there are other factors besides his statistics that make him a Hall of Famer in my book.
      Let's be honest here. Puckett was a first ballot sympathy vote. An extremely talented player that everybody loved, a guy who had one of the most memorable WS moments in history, a guy whose career was cut short at age 36 when he was still a very productive player.

      At his peak, Puckett was an incredible player. Do his counting stats warrant a HoF vote? No, they probably don't... But voters took into consideration that his career was cut short by as many as three productive seasons and voted for him anyway. There's your difference. Jack Morris had a full, productive career. Puckett had three-quarters of a career before retiring due to glaucoma.

      Quote Originally Posted by bwille View Post
      If you look at pitchers from the early 1900s and you see that they won an astronomical number of games--records that will likely never be broken--with an astounding number of starts and innings and then tried to compare all other pitchers from different eras to that era, nobody would come close to their production. No pitchers would be allowed in because if we judged everyone by the standard set then, everyone would fall short. Players are different now. The game is different now. Should we leave people out from different eras who were the best players of their respective eras even though it statistical doesn't compare well to other eras? I believe the answer to that is no and I'm sorry, but no statistical or Sabermetrical analysis will change that opinion for me.
      But was Morris the best player of his generation? He was the most durable, sure. But the best? It's hard to make that argument. At any given moment in Morris' career, there was somebody else in the limelight, whether it was Hershiser, Saberhagen, Clemens, or Gooden.
    1. Brad Swanson's Avatar
      Brad Swanson -
      I have to admit, I don't fully understand the Puckett comparison. Puckett doesn't meet the longevity argument because he lost his career to an eye condition at a youngish age. Most of Morris' argument comes partially from his longevity. Puckett got in because he was dynamic while active and I'm guessing some voters projected some productivity from the years that he lost to his condition.

      The Opening Day starts and Game 1 World Series starts are nice, but you can't just measure a player on those factors. Look at Dan Petry's stats from 1982-1985. I think it is fair to say he was at least as good as Morris, if not better. But, he was four years younger and had been with the team for less time. In addition, Morris was the Opening Day starter in 1989, 1990, 1992 and 1993, all seasons in which he didn't really pitch like an "Ace."

      It's great that he was the best pitcher of his exact era, but how many pitchers pitched the exact same years that Morris did?
    1. cmathewson's Avatar
      cmathewson -
      Quote Originally Posted by Brock Beauchamp View Post
      Let's be honest here. Puckett was a first ballot sympathy vote. An extremely talented player that everybody loved, a guy who had one of the most memorable WS moments in history, a guy whose career was cut short at age 36 when he was still a very productive player.

      At his peak, Puckett was an incredible player. Do his counting stats warrant a HoF vote? No, they probably don't... But voters took into consideration that his career was cut short by as many as three productive seasons and voted for him anyway. There's your difference. Jack Morris had a full, productive career. Puckett had three-quarters of a career before retiring due to glaucoma.



      But was Morris the best player of his generation? He was the most durable, sure. But the best? It's hard to make that argument. At any given moment in Morris' career, there was somebody else in the limelight, whether it was Hershiser, Saberhagen, Clemens, or Gooden.
      Right. He never won a Cy Young award, for example.
    1. OldManWinter's Avatar
      OldManWinter -
      Spy cake @ 10:32am. Records you want? Blyleven got Roberts record of HR's allowed.
      If the focus to leave both of them out on the face of HR's allowed there would be a case. Neither were the most dominant pitcher in their era either.

      But, they are both in.
    1. cmathewson's Avatar
      cmathewson -
      Quote Originally Posted by Brad Swanson View Post
      I have to admit, I don't fully understand the Puckett comparison. Puckett doesn't meet the longevity argument because he lost his career to an eye condition at a youngish age. Most of Morris' argument comes partially from his longevity. Puckett got in because he was dynamic while active and I'm guessing some voters projected some productivity from the years that he lost to his condition.

      The Opening Day starts and Game 1 World Series starts are nice, but you can't just measure a player on those factors. Look at Dan Petry's stats from 1982-1985. I think it is fair to say he was at least as good as Morris, if not better. But, he was four years younger and had been with the team for less time. In addition, Morris was the Opening Day starter in 1989, 1990, 1992 and 1993, all seasons in which he didn't really pitch like an "Ace."

      It's great that he was the best pitcher of his exact era, but how many pitchers pitched the exact same years that Morris did?
      If you wanted to contrast two players from the same era, you would be hard pressed to pick two more different players. In particular, Kirby was a 90 on a scale of 100 in intangibles. Morris was a 40. He had all the competitiveness of Puck, with none of the charm.

      (Now, Puck was voted in before all his off-field stuff came to light. I'm not sure he would have made the Veteran's Committee vote if he hadn't been voted in.)
    1. nicksaviking's Avatar
      nicksaviking -
      Quote Originally Posted by bwille View Post
      What is being forgotten in this article that I wrote was that my argument for Morris is not solely based on statistics or any Sabermetrics analysis. The reason I used the Puckett comparison is to show that statistics aren't the only reason a player gets elected to the Hall. I do not believe that Puckett's statistics alone got him in the Hall. To me, there has to be more to it than that. That is why I believe that Morris deserved to be in the Hall as well because there are other factors besides his statistics that make him a Hall of Famer in my book.
      Acutally this is why Morris does not belong in the Hall of Fame. Puckett got into the Hall because his reputation during his playing days and upon his retirement was that he was a HOF caliber player. This is evidenced by his high vote total his first year eligible and the many All-Star game appearances and MVP votes he got. He didn't need the stats to get in.

      Morris was struggling to get 20% of the vote on his first ballots and didn't get nearly the All-Star and Cy Young love that Puckett got. That demonstrates "the other factors" were not there for Morris, at least not like they were for other Hall of Famers who made it in based on reputation over stats.

      Puckett was recognized as a HOF player while he was active, Morris was not. What could have changed?
    1. old nurse's Avatar
      old nurse -
      Quote Originally Posted by Willihammer View Post
      There were 124 pitchers who threw min. 1000 IP and whose careers partially or totally are captured in the years 1977-1994. They are

      Row Labels Sum of WAR
      Roger Clemens 139.2
      Tom Seaver 106.1
      Greg Maddux 104.8
      Randy Johnson 104.1
      Phil Niekro 97.3
      Bert Blyleven 96.4
      Gaylord Perry 93.6
      Pedro Martinez 85.9
      Steve Carlton 84
      Nolan Ryan 83.7
      Fergie Jenkins 82.7
      Mike Mussina 82.7
      Curt Schilling 80.7
      Tom Glavine 74
      Don Sutton 68.8
      Kevin Brown 68.7
      Rick Reuschel 68.2
      Jim Palmer 67.9
      John Smoltz 66.6
      Luis Tiant 65.9
      Tommy John 62.2
      David Cone 61.8
      Bret Saberhagen 59.2
      Chuck Finley 58.4
      Frank Tanana 57.6
      Jerry Koosman 57.2
      Dave Stieb 56.8
      Kevin Appier 55
      David Wells 53.5
      Wilbur Wood 52.3
      Orel Hershiser 51.7
      Kenny Rogers 51.1
      Jamie Moyer 50.3
      Mark Langston 50.2
      Jimmy Key 49.4
      Mickey Lolich 48.9
      Dwight Gooden 48
      Ron Guidry 47.9
      Frank Viola 47.3
      Steve Rogers 45.4
      Jim Kaat 45.4
      Vida Blue 45.1
      Jack Morris 43.9
      Bob Welch 43.6
      Al Leiter 42.7
      Tom Candiotti 42.6
      Rich Gossage 41.9
      Danny Darwin 40.6
      John Candelaria 40.1
      Charlie Hough 39.3
      Jon Matlack 39
      Mark Gubicza 37.6
      Andy Messersmith 37.4
      Fernando Valenzuela 37.3
      Burt Hooton 36.5
      Catfish Hunter 36.5
      Jose Rijo 35
      Tom Gordon 35
      Bruce Hurst 35
      Doyle Alexander 34.8
      Larry Dierker 34.4
      John Tudor 34.3
      Tim Wakefield 34.3
      Charlie Leibrandt 34.3
      Pat Hentgen 33
      Jerry Reuss 32.8
      Rick Wise 32
      Mike Boddicker 31.7
      Andy Benes 31.4
      John Hiller 31.4
      Sid Fernandez 31.3
      Rick Sutcliffe 31.2
      John Denny 31.1
      Teddy Higuera 30.7
      Jim Barr 30.6
      Greg Swindell 30.3
      Rick Rhoden 30.1
      Scott Sanderson 29.7
      Lee Smith 29.5
      Mike Cuellar 29.5
      Kevin Tapani 29.2
      Mike Morgan 29
      Joe Niekro 28.6
      Pedro Astacio 28.5
      Mike Moore 28.2
      Trevor Hoffman 28.2
      Jack McDowell 27.9
      Alex Fernandez 27.8
      Doug Drabek 27.7
      Woody Williams 27.7
      Ken Forsch 27.1
      Ken Holtzman 27.1
      Mario Soto 26.8
      Tim Belcher 26.8
      Floyd Bannister 26.4
      Dennis Leonard 26.3
      Dave Stewart 26.2
      Kevin Gross 26.2
      Ramon Martinez 26.1
      Kent Tekulve 26.1
      Mike Flanagan 26
      Gary Nolan 25.8
      Jon Lieber 25.5
      Jeff Fassero 25.2
      Joe Coleman 25.1
      Charles Nagy 25.1
      Rollie Fingers 25.1
      Ron Reed 25.1
      Wilson Alvarez 25
      Dan Quisenberry 24.8
      Scott Erickson 24.8
      Steve Trachsel 24.8
      Juan Guzman 24.7
      Chris Bosio 24.6
      Bob Ojeda 24.6
      Ismael Valdez 24.5
      Bruce Sutter 24.5
      Mike Torrez 24.1
      Stan Bahnsen 24
      Mike Scott 23.9
      Bill Gullickson 23.9
      Bob Stanley 23.9
      John Franco 23.5
      Dave Goltz 23.4
      There's Morris at 43.
      In your method of looking at players you would then consider Randy Johnson, Vida Blue and Jim Kaat contemporaries of Morris. That hardly refutes the notion that Morris was the dominate pitcher of the 1980's.
    1. Thrylos's Avatar
      Thrylos -
      Quote Originally Posted by old nurse View Post
      In your method of looking at players you would then consider Randy Johnson, Vida Blue and Jim Kaat contemporaries of Morris. That hardly refutes the notion that Morris was the dominate pitcher of the 1980's.
      Randy Johnson is in a different stratosphere than Morris and the others mentioned here. Same era, but dominant, unlike Morris. There are 38 pitchers between Randy Johnson and Morris. And there are 24 pitchers between Morris and the closest Hall of Famer (Jim Palmer.) And, yes, Gooden and Viola (and Wells and Stieb) were true Aces (unlike Morris) in Morris' time but they are not in the Hall as well.
    1. Jim H's Avatar
      Jim H -
      I don't really get worked about Hall of Fame votes, for a great many reasons. But one of the things to keep in mind with the Hall of Fame (in other sports as well) it is really the Hall of the Famous. There were contemparies of Brooks Robinson whose numbers are roughly comparable, they just didn't happen to play for as good of a team or put on an incredible World Series defensive performance just when TV was becoming big.

      In the case of Blyleven, he had no chance of getting into the Hall of Fame until he became a broadcaster and basically compaigned for it for 10 years. That doesn't mean he didn't deserve it necessarily, but he had never had a great series of peak years, he wasn't the ace on any of the playoff teams he played for, and spent some of his best years in Texas, Minnesota and Cleveland when nobody was paying any attention to those teams.


      To some degree, whether it is fair or not, all marginal candidates run into those sort of issues. You need something to set you apart from the crowd if your numbers don't clearly put you in the Hall of Fame. Hall of Fame voters are going to get ripped no matter what they do. Everyone has different standards for the Hall of Fame and virtually any marginal selection will be picked apart by someone. Even here, everyone is all over the place on Jack Morris.
    1. darin617's Avatar
      darin617 -
      Jack Morris is not a HOF pitcher. High era 3.90 and a K/9 that any current Twins pitcher would kill for 5.6K/9 does not make you think of a pitcher deserving of the HOF. If he was worthy how many Cy Young awards does he own? The answer zero. So you can't even say he was ever the best pitcher in any season of his career. I am not a Morris hater just telling it the way I see it.
      I would like to thank him for the 2 World Series games that he won as a Twin.
©2014 TwinsCentric, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Interested in advertising with Twins Daily? Click here.