Andy Petitte Hall Of Famer?

[Ozzy]

he's pitched a season worth of playoff games cause there's so many fucking playoff games. if Ford had three rounds of playoffs he'd have over a hundred playoff wins. And a 3.88 career ERA is as dominating as a .250 batting avg. If Pettite is a first ballot, Clemens shouldn't even require a vote.

[joeyboy]

good point ozzy. i agree

[Ozzy]

To be fair I probably exaggerated a bit in my first post. I said not remotely close. I'd correct that to say he's a step below the borderline. The 240 wins and post season even on a powerhouse team should account for something. But I still wouldn't put him in.

[LorenzoDeMedici]

....There are actually 7 people who are either so blind to or don't care about the facts enough to actually say he should be IN? What exactly are you basing that on?? Even with there being more pitchers in the HOF than any other 3 positions combined. There are still only an avg. of 1 per generation(15 yrs.)How in the world would you even say he was in the top 4 or 5 of his contemporaries??? That being said I do have to admit there are a few guys in there that aren't as statistaclly dominant either, but these were guys from the 20's 30's and 40's. When there were less teams and less pitchers so for their era THEY were dominant. ie. Red Ruffiing, Ted Lyons, Jesse Haines. So he was a Great guy ...so what? Now mind you I think he was a pretty good guy, and I think he was more than likely telling the truth about the HGH. But what "I" THINK doesn't matter. He Did it and if other guys are going to be held out for doing it than he should as well and thats beyond the fact that he doesn't belong anyway.

[LISteve]

To say he absolutely is not even close is being unfair. It does not matter that he played on a great team ... so did Smoltz, Glavine and Maddox ... all Hall of Famers, Yet Pettitte squared off against these guys AND HE BEAT THEM!!!! IN THE WORLD SERIES. If you say that doesn't count then go ask all those fans in Atlanta. Maybe if they had someone who could suck it up more in the postseason when it counted the Braves would have won MORE than one title. WINNING IN THE POSTSEASON is very important and now that it is easier to get in the postseason ... now it is more important to perform when you get there!! That is why CLiff Lee was so sought after. The guy's regular season performance is OK. Yes he won the Cy Young a few years ago but the guy has had not such a great resume during the regular season. Teams were pursuing him based on postseason performance. Pettitte was a postseason stud and that carries a ton of weight and to say it doesn't is just flat out wrong. THAT BEING SAID .... He was never really the ace of his staff and he never won a Cy Young (although he deserved it in 96). SO ... right now I am saying "no". However, I am very much on the fence and could change my mind. I am more upset that people automatically coronate people if they won 300 games. Glavine is a perfect example. I am saying that he is a Hall of Famer ... BUT ... I am just going to say that his 14-16 postseason record is a NEGATIVE. Some voters should say about him and Maddox that they were great regular season performers but boy ... we should really look at those postseason records ... they are POOR. Maybe we should take another look! I STILL VOTE FOR BOTH OF THEM TO GET IN SO DON'T RIP ME!!! HOWEVER .... some of you should recognize that postseason pitching performances equal world championships and Pettitte was a big part of FIVE RINGS!! He is definitely worthy of consideration .. and it is close.

[LorenzoDeMedici]

Did You vote that he should be in?? If not then your not the guy I am saying is clueless.
#1 I did not say "he absolutely is not even close" . There is a distinction between "not even close" and "CLEARLY Not" He is pretty close but is CLEARLY Not a HOF. In other words while he is very close the decision as to whether he should be or not is easy...I'm assuming you made it yourself in rather short time.
#2 I never said he should be discounted for being on the Yankees, you may have thought I implied that with my comments about Mussina. But those comments were really ABOUT Mussina more than they were taking away from Pettitte. The only area that I would say that you can't "credit" him for is the # of Wins in the postseason. You can't take it away but you can't say it makes him better than someone else either.
#3 For the record...look it up if you like, He only has better post season statistics than Glavine. And in Glavine's defense while his playoff stats are shitty, he really only had 1 bad World Series game otherwise he was 4-2 with a sub 2 ERA...Oh btw that 1 bad game he lost to Pettitte, well did he really lose to Pettitte(who gave up 5 over 3 innings)? or the Yankee bats?? Oh and also btw... I think Glavine being HOF is up for debate.
#4 He beat them toe to toe huh...really. Well besides the previously mentioned stinker against Glavine. Take a look at his overall record against those Atlanta pitchers in 3 starts. He had a great game 5 in 96 but here ya go.
W L IP ER ERA H BB
1 1 13.6 12 7.94 21 5
Pretty un-impressive..aww who's kidding pretty..SHITTY!

Besides that, everyone wants to say he was a great post season pitcher and Clutch....Great no problem but a 3.83 era in the post season is not really Great. And ODDS are if you play enough post season games and you are a VERY GOOD pitcher. You will throw a gem here and there. Now I do give him credit for throwing the gem at oft times the biggest moment.
#5 Go ahead and look at Maddox, Glavine, and Smoltz Post Season #s...but look at all the #s not just the Wins. Try ERA etc.
W L IP ER ERA H BB WHIP
Glavine 14 16 218.1 80 3.30 191 87 1.27
Pettite 19 10 263 112 3.83 271 72 1.30
Smoltz 15 4 209 62 2.67 172 67 1.14
Maddux 11 14 198 72 3.27 97 51 0.75

Truth be told Smoltz was probably the most dominant post season pitcher of the 4 guys we are talkin about. And I would actually say HE is a HOFer over Glavine and Pettitte both...CLEARLY
In the end Maddux and Smoltz Clearly HOFers, Glavine probably..Pettitte "Very Close" but Clearly not.

[LorenzoDeMedici]

is this. If your only going to put 4 or 5 guys over the past 20 years in, who would they be:
Or which 5 guys is Andy better than?
In my personal order.(ridiculously close between the first 3 and between the bottom 3)
Maddux
Martinez
Johnson
Clemens
Smoltz
Glavine
Schilling
Mussina
Pettitte

[LISteve]

Lorenzo ... I agree with your order ... although I put Martinez down under Glavine. He was one of the most dominant pitchers but it was shortlived. Too many injuries and inability to stay on the field. I know he had a span where he was the best player in baseball but his career kind of reminds me of Mattingly ... maybe the best for a few years but not great over long enough period of time. I may say no to Pedro and yes to Glavine.Glavine has close to 100 more wins than Pedro. That's significant.

[Ozzy]

I'd put Glavine over Smoltz and Clemens if we're not counting the steroids is a first ballot unanimous selection ...even though no one ever goes in that way. I wouldn't vote for the bottom three. And I've always been on the fence with Martinez.

[billyS]

Originally Posted by LISteve

Lorenzo ... I agree with your order ... although I put Martinez down under Glavine. He was one of the most dominant pitchers but it was shortlived. ... maybe the best for a few years but not great over long enough period of time.

Really? " not great over long enough period of time" you say? So then how do you feel about Koufax? He only had 12 seasons in the majors and the first six were bad when was under .500 at 36-40.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/pl...oufasa01.shtml

Of course the next six were brilliant and totally dominant, which is why he is in the HOF but we are only talking about six seasons. So it is obvious that the voters consider a short brilliant burst enough.

Given that Pedro in a no brainer. In fact Pedro's prime years 1997 thru 2005 are more impressive then Koufaxs' given the eras they pitched in.

Koufax pitched against other pitchers 3 or 4 times a game plus the line-ups were much weaker, middle infielders never hit much more then .240.
The mound was 15 inches through out Sandy's career (it was lowered after the 1968 season, a full two years after he retired). That extra height made the curve ball much harder to hit and gave the pitcher much more leverage.

Plus Pedro made his hay against the steroid, DH fueled lineups and did it mostly in the AL against some monster lineups of the Yankees, Indians, Mariners and Orioles.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/pl...artipe02.shtml

Given that, look at the 162 game average of both.

Wins losses ERA ininngs pitched K's BB k'/bb

Pedro 17 8 2.93 217 242 58 4.15
Sandy 16 8 2.76 222 229 78 2.93

There are the stats backed up by the two links I posted.

IMHO Pedro was better then Koufax.

[billyS]

Sorry I couldn't get the columns to lineup better for the stat comparison. Those stats are for over their entire careers as you can see if you go to the links I posted.

[billyS]

Originally Posted by LorenzoDeMedici

is this. If your only going to put 4 or 5 guys over the past 20 years in, who would they be:
Or which 5 guys is Andy better than?
In my personal order.(ridiculously close between the first 3 and between the bottom 3)
Maddux
Martinez
Johnson
Clemens
Smoltz
Glavine
Schilling
Mussina
Pettitte

Where would you put Cone and Wells?
What is interesting about your list is that 5 out of that nine were pitching in the 1999 WS, as was Cone. I think there were about 15 Cy Young awards between the starters in that WS.

[LISteve]

The arguments are very similar. However, Koufax was clearly the dominant force in baseball for the last 5 years of his career which only ended due to injury. Martinez was simply at the end of the line. They both have a 4 or 5 year period of dominance BUT Koufax's was much more pronounced. I know all about these statistics saying how great Pedro was .... but everyone in the game at the time said Koufax was in a league of his own and was a baseball god .... they weren't saying the same thing about Pedro. We will find out when his time for consideration comes up. I bet that it will be debated and he will not be an easy entry. In the end he barely won 200 games over 18 years and he was hurt a lot. Out of his 18 years it looks like only about half could be considered "Full" seasons. Also .... Some people consider Sandy Koufax the greatest pitcher of all time. I don't think you can make the same argument for Pedro. He might make it in but he is not going to get in by a landslide. Glavine has the 300 wins which whether we like it or not is a get into the HOF free pass ... much like 500 home runs ... although that may now be off the table due to the steroids era. Also ... Billy ... you really don't believe Pedro was better than Koufax do you? Be honest.

[LISteve]

Wells and Cone would fit at the bottom of that list. LOVED Cone. He had such guts. Saw him on MLB channell talking about the 95 playoff game #5. He pitched his arm off in that game and he was devistated that he couldn't finish off the Mariners. Cone was hurt a lot and just didn't have enough great years. As far as Wells is concerned ... he became dead to me once he walked off the mound in the 2003 world series and refused to come out for the 3rd inning (I think it was the 3rd). He said his back was hurting. Well ... he was pitching great ... it was his last start of the year so he had 6 months to recouperate and we only had Jeff Weaver available to pitch!! He should have TRIED!!! I believe the first batter Weaver faced was a young Miguel Cabrera who launched a home run to left. Thanks Boomer.

[billyS]

Originally Posted by LISteve

.... but everyone in the game at the time said Koufax was in a league of his own and was a baseball god .... they weren't saying the same thing about Pedro.

Who are 'they'. I'm giving you stats you're giving me 'they said'.

Originally Posted by LISteve

Also ... Billy ... you really don't believe Pedro was better than Koufax do you? Be honest.

Yes. Koufax pitched in a pitchers era and despite what 'they' said the Stats don't back it up

1966 (NL AL) Sandy Koufax (LAD) 1.73 Gary Peters (CHW) 1.98
1965 (NL AL) Sandy Koufax (LAD) 2.04 Sam McDowell (CLE) 2.18
1964 (NL AL) Sandy Koufax (LAD) 1.74 Dean Chance (LAA) 1.65
1963 (NL AL) Sandy Koufax (LAD) 1.88 Gary Peters (CHW) 2.33
1962 (NL AL) Sandy Koufax (LAD) 2.54 Hank Aguirre (DET) 2.21


2003 (NL AL) Jason Schmidt (SFG) 2.34 Pedro Martinez (BOS) 2.22
2002 (NL AL) Randy Johnson (ARI) 2.32 Pedro Martinez (BOS) 2.26

2000 (NL AL) Kevin Brown (LAD) 2.58 Pedro Martinez (BOS) 1.74
1999 (NL AL) Randy Johnson (ARI) 2.48 Pedro Martinez (BOS) 2.07

1997 (NL AL) Pedro Martinez (MON) 1.90 Roger Clemens (TOR) 2.05

Again, I'll try to get this stuff to line up but here are the years Koufax and Martinez lead their leagues in ERA. Look at the numbers and tell me who was much better then there leader in the other league?

http://www.baseball-reference.com/le..._leagues.shtml

[billyS]

Originally Posted by LISteve

As far as Wells is concerned ... he became dead to me once he walked off the mound in the 2003 world series and refused to come out for the 3rd inning (I think it was the 3rd). He said his back was hurting. Well ... he was pitching great ... it was his last start of the year so he had 6 months to recouperate and we only had Jeff Weaver available to pitch!! He should have TRIED!!! I believe the first batter Weaver faced was a young Miguel Cabrera who launched a home run to left. Thanks Boomer.

You're memory is off. The game Weaver gave up the walk off homer was Game 4. It wasn't Cabrera but Alex Gonzalez in the 12 inning (I do believe you are right about it being the first pitch).
But that wasn't the Wells game. Clemens started game 4.
http://www.baseball-reference.com/bo...00310220.shtml

The game you are talking about was game 5 and Wells only pitched 1 inning.
http://www.baseball-reference.com/bo...00310230.shtml

[Ozzy]

The reason Koufax gets a nod is because it's assumed he still had some more great years ahead. So his five might have been eight or more great years if not for the injury. Pedro's often shithead attitude and treatment of the press isn't going to win him any votes. Pedro was also a 6 inning pitcher. As dominant as he was, he rarely could get thru the 7th.

[LISteve]

When I say "they" I am referring to writers and players. As a baseball fan Billy I am sure you have heard it for decades about Koufax. I know about the stats, but very often numbers don't tell the whole story. Besides ... he threw poor Don Zimmer to the ground in Boston. And he was a head hunter. We can disagree on the Pedro vs Koufax ... but he was a Red Sox and a Met and then he went to the Phillies. At least we got to be his daddy again to close out his career!

[LISteve]

OK ... I was off on 2003. Contreras was awful that year in the playoffs. Wells should have sucked it up. He threw 8 pitches in a 1-2-3 inning. Go out there till you can't pitch anymore or you start to get hit. Torre should have forced him out to the mound. I am still angry and bitter over that series.

[billyS]

Originally Posted by LISteve

When I say "they" I am referring to writers and players. As a baseball fan Billy I am sure you have heard it for decades about Koufax.

Yes, I've heard people say Walter Johnson was the greatest pitcher also.

Originally Posted by LISteve

Besides ... he threw poor Don Zimmer to the ground in Boston. And he was a head hunter.

Yeah he was a dick, and Ozzy is right when he says 'Pedro's often shithead attitude and treatment of the press isn't going to win him any votes. . And as a Yankee fan I always relished in beating him. But looking at it objectively as a baseball fan, I think he belongs in the HOF.

Originally Posted by LISteve

We can disagree on the Pedro vs Koufax ...

yes we can....that's the beauty of sports

Originally Posted by LISteve

but he was a Red Sox and a Met and then he went to the Phillies. At least we got to be his daddy again to close out his career!

Yes, game 6 in 2009 was sweet!!

[billyS]

Steve, let me make one more point....I don't think Pedro was better then Koufax but I think what he accomplished given the era he pitched in was more impressive then what Koufax did.

Koufax retired two years before I started really following baseball so I never saw him pitch so I really can't say who I think was better.

[Ozzy]

Sports writers in general hold huge vendettas against athletes. I think Pedro pays for being a dick as much as Clemens does the roids. Clemens was on his way to maybe being the closest anyone ever got to unanimous. Now it remains to be seen if he's even a first ballot anymore. The one good thing Pedro has going for him is that in three or four years when his turn comes, the hall eligibles list is gonna be pretty thin with non roid users. They have to vote for someone.

[Heartbreaker]

Originally Posted by Ozzy

Sports writers in general hold huge vendettas against athletes.

Some guy I worked with who knew Phil Rizzuto well told me when Rizzuto was playing, he was too cheap (something I heard from several other people) to buy the sportswriters drinks/dinner and they eventually were the same sportswriters who didn't vote him into the HOF.

[LorenzoDeMedici]

...FUCK the Sportswriters. Why is something so important left in their jealous wimpy hands anyway. I'm so sick of hearing this. Everyone knows when an athlete is CLEARLY a HOFer but we gotta worry about whether they were "Nice" to the sportwriters or F%%^ING bought them drinks or dinner. Bunch of non-athletic, jealous pieces of shit! And they are virtually telling US who is worthy or not. Dumb ass system if ever there was one.

...guess I ranted a bit. Can ya tell this bothers me?? LOL

[LorenzoDeMedici]

..I REALLY wanna hear from the 2 people who voted
"Yes No Brainer First Ballot" Please state your case whoever you are?

They are probably sportswriters...heh heh

[LISteve]

It's one thing to not talk to the sportswriters and it is another thing to be outride rude or a dick to them. Let's face it .. some of these superstars are huge pieces of shit that take every opportunity to be rude. I bet you would be shocked at some of the things some of these guys have done. I would love to hear some stories. If we heard the truth maybe we wouldn't blame the voters. HOWEVER ... if a sportswriter didn't vote for Scooter because he wouldn't buy him a drink ... that guy should have had his voting priviledges yanked.

[Ozzy]

Well Pedro does have the 3000 K's and some rediculously strong era numbers.... but that's also because he didn't pitch into the late innings when tiring pitchers give up a meaningless run or two. Its also why he didnt get a lot more wins. He's not a first ballot. That's reserved for the all time greats.

[Ozzy]

Originally Posted by LorenzoDeMedici

...FUCK the Sportswriters. Why is something so important left in their jealous wimpy hands anyway. I'm so sick of hearing this. Everyone knows when an athlete is CLEARLY a HOFer but we gotta worry about whether they were "Nice" to the sportwriters or F%%^ING bought them drinks or dinner. Bunch of non-athletic, jealous pieces of shit! And they are virtually telling US who is worthy or not. Dumb ass system if ever there was one.

...guess I ranted a bit. Can ya tell this bothers me?? LOL

Thats because a lot of these awards were created by the writers. Originally handed out in their newspaper or magazine columns and eventually given credibility by the sports and the presentation of a trophy. If someone wants they can check on the history of certain awards but I think for example the MLB and NFL Rookie of the year awards originated in the The Sporting News. Now they call one of them the NFL/Gillette Rookie of the year.... or something like that. But it was the writers who the HoF committee turned to when they inducted the original 8 or 9 and have gone that way since with a few changes along the way.

[Heartbreaker]

Originally Posted by LISteve

It's one thing to not talk to the sportswriters and it is another thing to be outride rude or a dick to them. Let's face it .. some of these superstars are huge pieces of shit that take every opportunity to be rude. I bet you would be shocked at some of the things some of these guys have done. I would love to hear some stories. If we heard the truth maybe we wouldn't blame the voters. HOWEVER ... if a sportswriter didn't vote for Scooter because he wouldn't buy him a drink ... that guy should have had his voting priviledges yanked.

I agree 100%.

MLB HOF seems to be watered down.

[Ozzy]

Although... Steve Carlton who was never a friend of the press did get one of the highest vote totals ever. But "never a friend" (in other words he just didn't like to talk) is a bit different than being a dick.

What I want to know is who the writers were who didn't vote for Carlton and why. There should be mandatory explanation required of all voters who choose not to cast one of their 5 or 6 votes for a sure thing hall of famer. I want to know the 5 or 6 other guys a sports writer voted for over Carlton in that year. Actually I remember reading something recently so it might have been Cal Ripkins year and one of the writers who didn't vote for Ripkin instead used one of his votes for Joel Youngblood... or someone like that.