@1951WheatiesPremium said:
Not that it much matters but in my original post I outlined potential waiting times that would have solved this issue somewhat. Stick to the original plan - lots of snubs, infrequent ballots and voting.
I have always liked the idea of a Legends wing. My idea was 25 spots (like a real roster). To vote someone in you must also vote someone out. Fifteen hitters, ten pitchers.
I’m bothered by Pudge Rodriguez being first ballot and Joe DiMaggio and Cy Young being second ballot.
Killebrew retired 5th all time in HRS and had to wait 4 years.
2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set
@JoeBanzai said:
How does this have any meaning if you don't identify the players? Whoever it was that was retired for the four years certainly didn't pitch well in retirement, hope he isn't in, or was that Walter Johnson?
That one is Sandy Koufax, who pitched his last season at age 30. I think he belongs in the HOF, but I think he's a lower-tier member. The other one with all the "N/A"s is Catfish Hunter, who last pitched well at age 29 but stunk up the place until mercifully departing at age 33. Until Jack Morris stole his spot, I had assumed Hunter would always remain the worst pitcher in the HOF.
Beyond that, the first one's Palmer, the last one's Pedro, and the others are Blyleven, Seaver, and Gibson.
There's nothing special about the names I chose, and no order to them; they're just names as they came to me to demonstrate that the charge of "inconsistency" leveled at Tiant is nonsense. He had two truly HOF level seasons, but other than those, injuries and eventually old age, he was more consistent than the average pitcher, and the average HOF pitcher.
This is for you @thisistheshow - Jim Rice was actually a pretty good player.
@1951WheatiesPremium said:
Not that it much matters but in my original post I outlined potential waiting times that would have solved this issue somewhat. Stick to the original plan - lots of snubs, infrequent ballots and voting.
I have always liked the idea of a Legends wing. My idea was 25 spots (like a real roster). To vote someone in you must also vote someone out. Fifteen hitters, ten pitchers.
I’m bothered by Pudge Rodriguez being first ballot and Joe DiMaggio and Cy Young being second ballot.
Joe D was THIRD ballot. Fourth if you count the vote he got before retirement.
He went from leading the league in ERA to leading in walks and homers.
From 74-77, his ERA+: 133, 103, 129, 100
He was inconsistent.
I'm sorry, are you saying that as Tiant got older his effectiveness as a pitcher slowly declined? Because that would be news so Earth-shattering that it would cause me to rethink my very perception of reality.
But seriously, here's a few other pitchers' ERA+ from ages 33 to 36:
I could go on, but the point is so blindingly obvious there should be no need. By my count 3 of the above are legitimate candidates for the GOAT pitcher, and all of them, in addition to being in the HOF, had their best seasons before he was in his mid-30's.
And please note that the four year stretch you chose to highlight Tiant's "inconsistency" is almost certainly more consistent than an average four-year stretch from any pitcher.
How does this have any meaning if you don't identify the players? Whoever it was that was retired for the four years certainly didn't pitch well in retirement, hope he isn't in, or was that Walter Johnson?
Edited to add; Couldn't have been Johnson.....my bad.
I would guess that the pitcher who was retired from ages 33-36, is Sandy Koufax.
@craig44 said:
Rivera seems to be a slam dunk for everyone, but I really dont see a place in the hall for pitchers with such small sample sizes. he only threw 1283 innings in 19 years. He was great in the limited innings he worked, but for me, not nearly enough value.
Certainly there's a subjective element to it, but I wrote a lengthy post years ago about what defined a HOF pitcher and with a handful of exceptions - the "flukes", like Hunter and now Morris - it came down to their value. And for a pitcher, their value resides in the one thing that they are asked to do - not give up runs. And despite pitching so few innings, Rivera still managed to give up more than 300 runs fewer than an average pitcher. In that he beats not just the Hunters and Morrises befouling the bottom of the HOF, but also Juan Marichal, Steve Carlton, Sandy Koufax and a multitude of others. In fact, it places him in the top 10%-20% of all HOF pitchers. And when you look at his postseason (ERA of 0.70 over another 140+ innings) it just gets mind-boggling.
Rivera is a slam dunk, and deservedly so.
I agree that Rivera and closers have it easier to prevent runs at a better rate than starters do, especially if they know they are only going to pitch one inning....except Rivera is so far ahead of all other relievers that he gets some special consideration. After all, Rivera is the All-Time MLB leaders in ERA+(minimum 1,000 innings) at 205.
The best lockdown closers right now are
Kimbrell 211
Chapman 183
Jansen 173
Those guys are at less than half the innings of Rivera. Kimbrell needs another 700 innings of work at the same rate as his first 500 innings to match Rivera. He is 30 years old. Not going to happen. The others have no shot at all.
From Rivera's era
Wagner 187....but had 300 less innings.
Hoffman was at 141
I feel the same as Dallas....I don't view closers anywhere near the value of starters, but the best of the best have HOF merit and are equal in value to maybe second and third tier HOF starting pitchers.
I have always wondered why people called Mariano Rivera a ‘one pitch’ pitcher. I watched basically every inning he pitched from beginning to end with very little exception. The guy certainly had one of the best pitches any pitcher ever threw with his cutter but he also had great command of his two seam and four seam fastball.
I also think in another universe, he’d have been an excellent starter. He was only 25 when they ‘gave up’ on his starting career - in part because of his inconsistency and in part because they loaded up on quality starters in 1996, too, leaving no rotation spot for him. He would not have been the first late bloomer in MLB history.
As it stands, he is far and away the greatest closer of all time.
Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?
Regarding Mariano, it is obvious that a lot of the people that are saying that he shouldn’t get in,
Didn’t play or especially pitch in their younger days. The last 3 outs of the game are by far the hardest to get whether you are just trying to get the win or finish off a complete game or pitch a no-hitter. Would he be a slam-dunk had he played in Minnesota or Seattle? Maybe not, but because he closed so many big games for the YANKEES and won 5 World Series rings,, that is all that needs to be said.
Just because something happened in the past doesnt make it right. Ex. Great players in the past having to wait a few years to get in the hall. Shouldnt have happened then, shouldnt happen now just because it happened then.
What I Collect:
PSA HOF Baseball Postwar Rookies Set Registry- (Currently 80.51% Complete)
PSA Pro Football HOF Rookie Players Set Registry- (Currently 19.80% Complete)
PSA Basketball HOF Players Rookies Set Registry- (Currently 6.02% Complete)
@JoeBanzai said:
How does this have any meaning if you don't identify the players? Whoever it was that was retired for the four years certainly didn't pitch well in retirement, hope he isn't in, or was that Walter Johnson?
That one is Sandy Koufax, who pitched his last season at age 30. I think he belongs in the HOF, but I think he's a lower-tier member. The other one with all the "N/A"s is Catfish Hunter, who last pitched well at age 29 but stunk up the place until mercifully departing at age 33. Until Jack Morris stole his spot, I had assumed Hunter would always remain the worst pitcher in the HOF.
Beyond that, the first one's Palmer, the last one's Pedro, and the others are Blyleven, Seaver, and Gibson.
There's nothing special about the names I chose, and no order to them; they're just names as they came to me to demonstrate that the charge of "inconsistency" leveled at Tiant is nonsense. He had two truly HOF level seasons, but other than those, injuries and eventually old age, he was more consistent than the average pitcher, and the average HOF pitcher.
Thanks for the update!
2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set
@1951WheatiesPremium said:
I have always wondered why people called Mariano Rivera a ‘one pitch’ pitcher. I watched basically every inning he pitched from beginning to end with very little exception. The guy certainly had one of the best pitches any pitcher ever threw with his cutter but he also had great command of his two seam and four seam fastball.
I also think in another universe, he’d have been an excellent starter. He was only 25 when they ‘gave up’ on his starting career - in part because of his inconsistency and in part because they loaded up on quality starters in 1996, too, leaving no rotation spot for him. He would not have been the first late bloomer in MLB history.
As it stands, he is far and away the greatest closer of all time.
He would have been an excellent starter in another universe. One where he had more than two pitches and could work through a lineup three times. but in this universe, where he could air it out for 25 pitches or less and only go through a lineup once or less, no, he could not have been an excellent starter. he was horrible the 2nd and 3rd times through a lineup. that is why NY put him in a relief role. one many many many other great starters could do, but they are far far too valuable in the starting role for their manager to ever consider cutting their workload by 2/3 and making them a reliever.
@thenibbler said:
Regarding Mariano, it is obvious that a lot of the people that are saying that he shouldn’t get in,
Didn’t play or especially pitch in their younger days. The last 3 outs of the game are by far the hardest to get whether you are just trying to get the win or finish off a complete game or pitch a no-hitter. Would he be a slam-dunk had he played in Minnesota or Seattle? Maybe not, but because he closed so many big games for the YANKEES and won 5 World Series rings,, that is all that needs to be said.
No. the last three outs in the 9th are of exactly the same level of difficulty as any other out. they just happen to be the last three. actually, the most difficult outs to get are when a starter faces a lineup for the third (or less frequently now) time. Those hitters have seen everything the starter has, and usually that pitcher has already thrown 80 or so pitches. those are the hardest outs to get.
everyone remembers all the "saves" Rivera had. I remember him blowing 18 games against his biggest rival the red sox and also blowing the biggest game in 2001 thrown in with all those "saves"
@1951WheatiesPremium said:
I have always wondered why people called Mariano Rivera a ‘one pitch’ pitcher. I watched basically every inning he pitched from beginning to end with very little exception. The guy certainly had one of the best pitches any pitcher ever threw with his cutter but he also had great command of his two seam and four seam fastball.
I also think in another universe, he’d have been an excellent starter. He was only 25 when they ‘gave up’ on his starting career - in part because of his inconsistency and in part because they loaded up on quality starters in 1996, too, leaving no rotation spot for him. He would not have been the first late bloomer in MLB history.
As it stands, he is far and away the greatest closer of all time.
He would have been an excellent starter in another universe. One where he had more than two pitches and could work through a lineup three times. but in this universe, where he could air it out for 25 pitches or less and only go through a lineup once or less, no, he could not have been an excellent starter. he was horrible the 2nd and 3rd times through a lineup. that is why NY put him in a relief role. one many many many other great starters could do, but they are far far too valuable in the starting role for their manager to ever consider cutting their workload by 2/3 and making them a reliever.
They did the same thing for the largely the same reasons to Sandy Koufax at the beginning of his career. Over time, as he improved, he became a legend - as a starting pitcher.
One year after being removed from the rotation and going to bullpen full time, he pitched 107 innings and was used for multiple innings on multiple occasions and was one of the most useful and effective pitchers in baseball, starting the season as a 6th or 7th starter/long reliever and ending the season as our best bullpen pitcher. With Wetteland a free agent and wanting big money, the Yankees decided to go with Rivera as closer and let Wetteland walk.
I mention this because - at the time - there was some thought that the Yankees were going to give Rivera another crack at the rotation - lots of 2 and 3 inning appearances and that he had ‘figured something out’ that year. Alas, Wetteland walked and the decision was made.
I don’t think it’s crazy to think if given more time by the Yankees (or had he come up with another team), he could have been a very good or great MLB starter. Guys do get better, learn how to pitch and improve over time and he really wasn’t given much rope. Look at a guy like Noah Syndergaard - electric stuff, fairly good ratios, can’t pitch deep into games. There’s still value in that and he’s still regarded as a pretty solid pitcher. Not ace of the staff (not yet anyway) but maybe he takes the next step - that’s the hope, right? That he ‘figures it out’? Like Nolan Ryan and Sandy Koufax and a host of other guys who given time became great starting pitchers after working out of the bullpen?
Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?
Rivera (and all closers for that matter) are underwhelming to me for a few reasons. They pitch very very few innings and most of the innings they pitch are actually low stress ones. It isnt their fault, it is the way managers play it by the book. modern closers are saved until the 9th inning and normally when they have a lead to "save". you never see a closer come in during a huge rally in the fourth when the opposing team puts up the 5 runs that keeps the closer from pitching in the ninth because his team is behind. here are the numbers:
After 8 innings when leading by 1 run a team will win 86% of the time. leading by 2 94% of the time and leading by 3 97 % of the time.
Rivera had a career save % of 89.1%. going by the numbers, he actually "saved" games at a lower % than the average closer. now before you say he must have pitched in mostly late and close game situations, hear this. of his 652 saves, less than 1/3 were with a 1 run lead when he took the mound. 216 w/ 2 run lead 184 with 3 run lead and 46 with a 4 run lead. rivera was a closer for 18 years. he ranks 142nd all time in inherited runners. His average save was with at least a 2 run lead and no inherited runners. these are low stress situations. Situations where a lesser reliever could have done the job. Riveras peak value would have been as a "fireman" who entered to kill rallys. more games are lost in the first 8 innings than in the ninth. all "closers" should be used in that fashion, not saved for the 9th when most situations are actually fairly low leverage.
@craig44 said:
Rivera (and all closers for that matter) are underwhelming to me for a few reasons. They pitch very very few innings and most of the innings they pitch are actually low stress ones. It isnt their fault, it is the way managers play it by the book. modern closers are saved until the 9th inning and normally when they have a lead to "save". you never see a closer come in during a huge rally in the fourth when the opposing team puts up the 5 runs that keeps the closer from pitching in the ninth because his team is behind. here are the numbers:
After 8 innings when leading by 1 run a team will win 86% of the time. leading by 2 94% of the time and leading by 3 97 % of the time.
Rivera had a career save % of 89.1%. going by the numbers, he actually "saved" games at a lower % than the average closer. now before you say he must have pitched in mostly late and close game situations, hear this. of his 652 saves, less than 1/3 were with a 1 run lead when he took the mound. 216 w/ 2 run lead 184 with 3 run lead and 46 with a 4 run lead. rivera was a closer for 18 years. he ranks 142nd all time in inherited runners. His average save was with at least a 2 run lead and no inherited runners. these are low stress situations. Situations where a lesser reliever could have done the job. Riveras peak value would have been as a "fireman" who entered to kill rallys. more games are lost in the first 8 innings than in the ninth. all "closers" should be used in that fashion, not saved for the 9th when most situations are actually fairly low leverage.
I disagree with none of this but most players don’t really get to pick how they’re used (not then, maybe a little more so now).
Given a job, he did it better than anyone for his career and by a pretty good margin.
Getting back to why I posted, though, and the discussion at hand, Trevor Bauer is another good example of a guy who improved in many ways given time to pitch in the major leagues - adding pitches, improving existing pitches and learning to pitch deeper into games. It happens quite often. Many guys do get better given time and experience - something Rivera was not afforded.
In large part because the Yankees were adding quality starters annually in the middle of the run in the 90s and in part because he filled the void left by the departure of John Wetteland.
Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?
By the way, Mariano threw his first cutter in 1997. To be accurate, that is after his first full season in the bullpen and having never thrown it even once before.
He still maintains it was a ‘Gift from God’; he did not cultivate it or learn it from someone, he didn’t change his grip or arm angle. One day in Detroit, the ball started moving while he was having a catch with Ramiro Mendoza. That’s it - that’s where it came from.
Crazy.
Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?
Just from the conversations above and knowing that the voters are probably similar, I see Rivera getting around 95% of the vote, no where near Griffey.
@3stars said:
Just from the conversations above and knowing that the voters are probably similar, I see Rivera getting around 95% of the vote, no where near Griffey.
Maybe but Mo had a great relationship with the press (like Griffey) and is the unquestioned (right?) greatest player at his position of all time.
I just feel like even people who completely dismiss the way he was used or believe bullpen pitchers are overrated still tend to recognize his being a pretty special talent. And he’ll be bolstered by a fairly week class, too.
But The Kid is probably safe - I agree.
Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?
@craig44 said:
Rivera (and all closers for that matter) are underwhelming to me for a few reasons. They pitch very very few innings and most of the innings they pitch are actually low stress ones. It isnt their fault, it is the way managers play it by the book. modern closers are saved until the 9th inning and normally when they have a lead to "save". you never see a closer come in during a huge rally in the fourth when the opposing team puts up the 5 runs that keeps the closer from pitching in the ninth because his team is behind. here are the numbers:
After 8 innings when leading by 1 run a team will win 86% of the time. leading by 2 94% of the time and leading by 3 97 % of the time.
Rivera had a career save % of 89.1%. going by the numbers, he actually "saved" games at a lower % than the average closer. now before you say he must have pitched in mostly late and close game situations, hear this. of his 652 saves, less than 1/3 were with a 1 run lead when he took the mound. 216 w/ 2 run lead 184 with 3 run lead and 46 with a 4 run lead. rivera was a closer for 18 years. he ranks 142nd all time in inherited runners. His average save was with at least a 2 run lead and no inherited runners. these are low stress situations. Situations where a lesser reliever could have done the job. Riveras peak value would have been as a "fireman" who entered to kill rallys. more games are lost in the first 8 innings than in the ninth. all "closers" should be used in that fashion, not saved for the 9th when most situations are actually fairly low leverage.
Interesting stats, I would have thought he would have been far superior than average. Usually hear about “blown saves”, but not the level of detail you shared.
Comments
Killebrew retired 5th all time in HRS and had to wait 4 years.
That one is Sandy Koufax, who pitched his last season at age 30. I think he belongs in the HOF, but I think he's a lower-tier member. The other one with all the "N/A"s is Catfish Hunter, who last pitched well at age 29 but stunk up the place until mercifully departing at age 33. Until Jack Morris stole his spot, I had assumed Hunter would always remain the worst pitcher in the HOF.
Beyond that, the first one's Palmer, the last one's Pedro, and the others are Blyleven, Seaver, and Gibson.
There's nothing special about the names I chose, and no order to them; they're just names as they came to me to demonstrate that the charge of "inconsistency" leveled at Tiant is nonsense. He had two truly HOF level seasons, but other than those, injuries and eventually old age, he was more consistent than the average pitcher, and the average HOF pitcher.
Joe D was THIRD ballot. Fourth if you count the vote he got before retirement.
I would guess that the pitcher who was retired from ages 33-36, is Sandy Koufax.
Steve
I agree that Rivera and closers have it easier to prevent runs at a better rate than starters do, especially if they know they are only going to pitch one inning....except Rivera is so far ahead of all other relievers that he gets some special consideration. After all, Rivera is the All-Time MLB leaders in ERA+(minimum 1,000 innings) at 205.
The best lockdown closers right now are
Kimbrell 211
Chapman 183
Jansen 173
Those guys are at less than half the innings of Rivera. Kimbrell needs another 700 innings of work at the same rate as his first 500 innings to match Rivera. He is 30 years old. Not going to happen. The others have no shot at all.
From Rivera's era
Wagner 187....but had 300 less innings.
Hoffman was at 141
I feel the same as Dallas....I don't view closers anywhere near the value of starters, but the best of the best have HOF merit and are equal in value to maybe second and third tier HOF starting pitchers.
I have always wondered why people called Mariano Rivera a ‘one pitch’ pitcher. I watched basically every inning he pitched from beginning to end with very little exception. The guy certainly had one of the best pitches any pitcher ever threw with his cutter but he also had great command of his two seam and four seam fastball.
I also think in another universe, he’d have been an excellent starter. He was only 25 when they ‘gave up’ on his starting career - in part because of his inconsistency and in part because they loaded up on quality starters in 1996, too, leaving no rotation spot for him. He would not have been the first late bloomer in MLB history.
As it stands, he is far and away the greatest closer of all time.
Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/987963/1951-wheaties-premium-photos-set-registry#latest
Regarding Mariano, it is obvious that a lot of the people that are saying that he shouldn’t get in,
Didn’t play or especially pitch in their younger days. The last 3 outs of the game are by far the hardest to get whether you are just trying to get the win or finish off a complete game or pitch a no-hitter. Would he be a slam-dunk had he played in Minnesota or Seattle? Maybe not, but because he closed so many big games for the YANKEES and won 5 World Series rings,, that is all that needs to be said.
Just because something happened in the past doesnt make it right. Ex. Great players in the past having to wait a few years to get in the hall. Shouldnt have happened then, shouldnt happen now just because it happened then.
PSA HOF Baseball Postwar Rookies Set Registry- (Currently 80.51% Complete)
PSA Pro Football HOF Rookie Players Set Registry- (Currently 19.80% Complete)
PSA Basketball HOF Players Rookies Set Registry- (Currently 6.02% Complete)
Thanks for the update!
Not sure if Tiant is a HOFer nut I sure did like watching his delivery home.
I agree name names.
It is hard to imagine pudge is 1st ballot and Joe D was 2nd.Times are different
Now we deal with the PED issue
On the other hand what would we think if we saw Greg Madduxx smoking in the dugout
1948-76 Topps FB Sets
FB & BB HOF Player sets
1948-1993 NY Yankee Team Sets
He would have been an excellent starter in another universe. One where he had more than two pitches and could work through a lineup three times. but in this universe, where he could air it out for 25 pitches or less and only go through a lineup once or less, no, he could not have been an excellent starter. he was horrible the 2nd and 3rd times through a lineup. that is why NY put him in a relief role. one many many many other great starters could do, but they are far far too valuable in the starting role for their manager to ever consider cutting their workload by 2/3 and making them a reliever.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
No. the last three outs in the 9th are of exactly the same level of difficulty as any other out. they just happen to be the last three. actually, the most difficult outs to get are when a starter faces a lineup for the third (or less frequently now) time. Those hitters have seen everything the starter has, and usually that pitcher has already thrown 80 or so pitches. those are the hardest outs to get.
everyone remembers all the "saves" Rivera had. I remember him blowing 18 games against his biggest rival the red sox and also blowing the biggest game in 2001 thrown in with all those "saves"
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
They did the same thing for the largely the same reasons to Sandy Koufax at the beginning of his career. Over time, as he improved, he became a legend - as a starting pitcher.
One year after being removed from the rotation and going to bullpen full time, he pitched 107 innings and was used for multiple innings on multiple occasions and was one of the most useful and effective pitchers in baseball, starting the season as a 6th or 7th starter/long reliever and ending the season as our best bullpen pitcher. With Wetteland a free agent and wanting big money, the Yankees decided to go with Rivera as closer and let Wetteland walk.
I mention this because - at the time - there was some thought that the Yankees were going to give Rivera another crack at the rotation - lots of 2 and 3 inning appearances and that he had ‘figured something out’ that year. Alas, Wetteland walked and the decision was made.
I don’t think it’s crazy to think if given more time by the Yankees (or had he come up with another team), he could have been a very good or great MLB starter. Guys do get better, learn how to pitch and improve over time and he really wasn’t given much rope. Look at a guy like Noah Syndergaard - electric stuff, fairly good ratios, can’t pitch deep into games. There’s still value in that and he’s still regarded as a pretty solid pitcher. Not ace of the staff (not yet anyway) but maybe he takes the next step - that’s the hope, right? That he ‘figures it out’? Like Nolan Ryan and Sandy Koufax and a host of other guys who given time became great starting pitchers after working out of the bullpen?
Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/987963/1951-wheaties-premium-photos-set-registry#latest
Rivera (and all closers for that matter) are underwhelming to me for a few reasons. They pitch very very few innings and most of the innings they pitch are actually low stress ones. It isnt their fault, it is the way managers play it by the book. modern closers are saved until the 9th inning and normally when they have a lead to "save". you never see a closer come in during a huge rally in the fourth when the opposing team puts up the 5 runs that keeps the closer from pitching in the ninth because his team is behind. here are the numbers:
After 8 innings when leading by 1 run a team will win 86% of the time. leading by 2 94% of the time and leading by 3 97 % of the time.
Rivera had a career save % of 89.1%. going by the numbers, he actually "saved" games at a lower % than the average closer. now before you say he must have pitched in mostly late and close game situations, hear this. of his 652 saves, less than 1/3 were with a 1 run lead when he took the mound. 216 w/ 2 run lead 184 with 3 run lead and 46 with a 4 run lead. rivera was a closer for 18 years. he ranks 142nd all time in inherited runners. His average save was with at least a 2 run lead and no inherited runners. these are low stress situations. Situations where a lesser reliever could have done the job. Riveras peak value would have been as a "fireman" who entered to kill rallys. more games are lost in the first 8 innings than in the ninth. all "closers" should be used in that fashion, not saved for the 9th when most situations are actually fairly low leverage.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
I disagree with none of this but most players don’t really get to pick how they’re used (not then, maybe a little more so now).
Given a job, he did it better than anyone for his career and by a pretty good margin.
Getting back to why I posted, though, and the discussion at hand, Trevor Bauer is another good example of a guy who improved in many ways given time to pitch in the major leagues - adding pitches, improving existing pitches and learning to pitch deeper into games. It happens quite often. Many guys do get better given time and experience - something Rivera was not afforded.
In large part because the Yankees were adding quality starters annually in the middle of the run in the 90s and in part because he filled the void left by the departure of John Wetteland.
Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/987963/1951-wheaties-premium-photos-set-registry#latest
By the way, Mariano threw his first cutter in 1997. To be accurate, that is after his first full season in the bullpen and having never thrown it even once before.
He still maintains it was a ‘Gift from God’; he did not cultivate it or learn it from someone, he didn’t change his grip or arm angle. One day in Detroit, the ball started moving while he was having a catch with Ramiro Mendoza. That’s it - that’s where it came from.
Crazy.
Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/987963/1951-wheaties-premium-photos-set-registry#latest
Just from the conversations above and knowing that the voters are probably similar, I see Rivera getting around 95% of the vote, no where near Griffey.
Why is it a joke?
Maybe but Mo had a great relationship with the press (like Griffey) and is the unquestioned (right?) greatest player at his position of all time.
I just feel like even people who completely dismiss the way he was used or believe bullpen pitchers are overrated still tend to recognize his being a pretty special talent. And he’ll be bolstered by a fairly week class, too.
But The Kid is probably safe - I agree.
Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/987963/1951-wheaties-premium-photos-set-registry#latest
Interesting stats, I would have thought he would have been far superior than average. Usually hear about “blown saves”, but not the level of detail you shared.