Ten Innings To Cooperstown: The Jack Morris Story
Jack Morris sealed his reputation as big game pitcher on October 19, 1991. He pitched a 10 inning shutout that day, winning game 7 of the World Series by a score of 1-0 to make the Minnesota Twins the champions of baseball. It is without question one of the great pitching performances in World Series history. Jack Morris was a gamer, there's no doubt about it.
Jack's Game 7 classic wasn't his only shining moment in October either. He had a 7-4 post-season record in 13 starts, with a 3.80 ERA (even more impressive, he won 7 of his first 8 decisions before a rocky post-season in '92) . As is the case with many great post-season pitchers, he was even better in the World Series, going 4-2 with a 2.96 ERA in seven starts for Detroit, Minnesota and Toronto. He was 4-0 with a 1.54 ERA in his first two World Series (in '84 and '91), before going 0-2 for the Blue Jays in the '92 WS. Guidry was better in October, but Morris was close, particularly if you give him extra-credit for his 10-inning Game 7 shutout (and I think we should).
Morris went 13-13 in 30 September starts in those four races with a 3.34 ERA. He had a particulary difficult time in games against the other contenders in those races, losing twice in the last nine games to eventual division winner Milwaukee in 1981 and losing critical September starts to Baltimore in '83 and Toronto in '87. He was stellar in '92 with Toronto, going 4-1 in 7 September starts with a 3.40 ERA. Morris made two September starts for Toronto in 1993, losing his only decision.
His record over six September pennant races with Detroit and Toronto (Minnesota waltzed to the division title in 1991) was 17-15 in 39 starts, with a 3.44 ERA in 290.2 innings. By my scorecard, Jack Morris was great in five starts in two World Series, bad in two starts in a third World Series, and thoroughly mediocre in 39 starts down the stretch in six pennant races. Based on this, I'd argue that Jack Morris's reputation as a big-game pitcher rests disproportionately on one ten inning game in October.Of course the issue of Jack Morris' big-game bona fides is critical to his Hall of Fame candidacy because his regular season credentials are generally considered short of Hall worthy. I'm agnostic on the issue of Morris' worthiness for the Hall, but I passionately believe that if Morris is now consistently polling above 40% in HOF ballots, then Ron Guidry should be inducted forthwith.
We compared Blyleven's, Morris' and Guidry's prime years in this post. Conveniently, both Morris and Guidry had a prime period of nine years, after which each experienced a precipitous decline. As demonstrated below, although each had approximately the same number of wins, Guidry had a significantly better ERA+ and a significantly greater winning percentage. Both Guidry and Morris pitched for fine teams in the late '70s and '80s, but Guidry's winning percentage over this nine year stretch was an astounding 26.5% better than the Yankees' winning percentage during the same period, while Morris outperformed his Tiger clubs by 13.9%.
But Morris fans would argue, quite fairly, that Jack put together a fine pair of seasons in '91 and '92, while Guidry was essentially finished after his nine-year run. In fairness to Jack, let's take his '91 and '92 seasons and substitute them for his two weakest seasons during his nine-year prime ('80 and '82, in each of which Morris was only one game over .500 with an ERA+ of approximately 100). This provides a comparison of Morris' best nine years in his 18 year career against Guidry's prime of nine consecutive years. Here's the comparison:
Morris narrows but doesn't erase his deficits in ERA, ERA+ and winning percentage. He averages approximately one more win per year, but averages approximately 3.5 starts more per year.
You don't have to take my word that Guidry '77 to '85 seasons were better than Morris' top nine; the Cy Young award voters clearly agreed. Morris received Cy Young award votes in seven of those nine seasons totaling a 0.75 career share. Guidry received Cy Young award votes in six of his nine prime seasons totaling a 1.91 career share.
If Guidry's '77 to '85 seasons were better than Morris' top nine, then Morris' huge edge in the Hall of Fame balloting must relate to the other nine years of his 18 year career - in which he was 90-100 with a 4.55 ERA. Or, more likely, Morris' burgeoning support in the HOF balloting rests in large measure on ten innings he pitched in October 1991.
In Some Septembers, He Wasn't Worth A Schilling
Curt Schilling's announcement of his retirement last month triggered the usual speculation about his qualifications for the Hall of Fame. The overwhelming consensus among both sportswriter and fans was that Curt was the best big game pitcher of his time, which compensated for his spotty regular season career record, and that he should be inducted into the Hall. I'll go on record and predict that Schilling will indeed cruise into the Hall, almost certainly in his first year of eligibility.
Let me get a few things out of the way first. Schilling's post-season record is great, without question. The line says it all: 11-2 with a 2.23 ERA in 133.1 innings across 19 starts. He was great in the 2001 World Series (although he was outdueled in his epic confrontation with Clemens in game 7), and was excellent in his two starts for Boston in the 2004 and 2007 World Series. I'm obviously a big advocate of giving significant weight to the "big game" records of Hall of Fame candidates, and Schilling's post-season record is a major plus for his candidacy. And he might have had even more post-season success had he not almost single-handedly ruined Arizona's pennant hopes in 2000.
The D'backs acquired Schilling from the Phillies in late July 2000, hoping to protect a slender lead over the Dodgers and Giants down the stretch. The D'backs were a half game in front of the Giant and 2.5 games in front of the Dodgers when Schilling made his first start for Arizona on July 28th, pitching an 8 inning, six-hit gem. He followed that with a six-hit shutout in his next start and three more solid starts, winning 4 of his first 5 starts for the D'Backs. And the D'Backs desperately needed each of those wins because, despite Curt's success, the D'Backs lost the lead and were trailing the Giants by 1.5 games after Schilling's complete game win on August 18th. With 41 games left to play, however, there was plenty of time for the D'Backs to cash in the dividends of their acquisition of Curt Schilling.
Schilling, however, lost his next four starts and went 0-5 in his six starts from Aug. 23 to Sept. 17, compiling a 6.08 ERA along the way. By the time Schilling beat the Giants on Sept. 22 it was almost over for the D'Backs, having already been eliminated in the division race and barely surviving in the wild-card race. The D'Backs, only 2.5 games back of the Giants on Aug. 30, were 12.5 back after getting eliminated on Sept. 21.
The D'backs coped considerably better with Schilling's September troubles in 2002. The D'backs were up by 9 games on Aug. 26. Schilling and Johnson were repeating their great 2001 performances and further establishing themselves as the greatest 1-2 pitching punch since Koufax and Drysdale in 1965. The D'backs were still 7 games up after Schilling's start on Sept. 15, winning in 13 innings after Schilling took a four run lead into the seventh and blew it over the next three innings (Schlling left after eight innings with a no-decision). On Sept. 20, with nine games left, Arizona was 7.5 games up and on the verge of clinching when Schilling took the mound. Schilling responded with his worst start of the year, giving up 14 hits and 9 runs in 7.1 innings. The D'backs lost each of their next four games as well, and by the time Curt made his next start against the Cardinals on Sept. 25 the D'backs were riding a five game losing streak that had shrunk their lead to 3.0 games with five to play. Schilling came out blazing against the Cards, striking out 7 in the first three innings, but surrendered three-run HRs to Rolen and Drew in the 4th and 8th innings and lost, 6-1. The lead was now 2 games with four to play. But Randy Johnson restored order the next day, pitching a complete game six-hitter, allowing only two unearned runs. The D'backs clinched the N.L. West the next day.
Curt was good in September of 2001 (3-0 in five starts, 3.41 ERA) and, as everyone should recall, great in October. But in three very hotly contested races in Arizona from 2000 to 2002 Schilling went 6-5 in 16 starts with a 4.54 ERA, and was instrumental in losing one division race for the D'backs and nearly losing another one.
Schilling's September record in his three races with the Red Sox (2004, 2005 and 2007) is better than his D'backs record, but still a mixed bag. He went 4-0 in five starts for the Sox in 2004, but in 2005 he won only his two of his first seven starts after returning to the Boston rotation in August (5.56 ERA in those seven starts) before beating the Yankees on the last day of the regular season - the day after the Yankees had clinched the division title. Schilling's woes contributed significantly to the Sox blowing a four game lead over the Yanks in the last three weeks of the season.
In 2006 the Yanks and Sox were staging another epic battle, with the Sox holding a 1 game lead over the Yanks in the AL East going into August. Schilling, however, won only one of his six August starts, going 1-3 with a 5.22 ERA, and the Sox were eight back by the time September arrived.
Schilling went 1-2 in four starts for the Sox in September 2007, bringing his record during the Sox's pennant race Septembers to 8-4 in 15 starts with a 3.29 ERA.
All told, Mr. Bloody Sock's record in September pennant races with the D'backs and Sox - the period in which he was considered by some the best big game pitcher in baseball - reads 14-9 in 31 starts, with a 3.95 ERA in 221 innings. Nothing to be ashamed of, to be sure, but certainly not in the same category as various other big game pitchers over the last 50 years. And certainly not in the same league as the greatest big game pitcher of the '70s and '80s - Ron Guidry.
Ironically, Schilling's best performance in a pennant race came in Philadelphia in 1993, long before Schilling acquired his reputation as a big game pitcher, when he went 5-1 with a 3.40 ERA in September to help the Phils hold off a late charge by the Expos. Throw September 1993 into the mix and Schillings September pennant race record is 19-10 in 37 starts, with a 3.86 ERA in 263.1 innings.
What Have HOF Voters Been Smoking?
To the right is Ron Guidry's record of vote support in the Hall of Fame balloting, straight from the official website of the HOF. He was dropped from the ballot in 2002 after dipping below 5% support. Take a good look, and then consider the following:
Lew Burdette received 24.1 of the vote in 1984 and topped 20% in five other years. He became a starting pitcher for the Milwaukee Braves in 1954 and over the next 8 years went 142-90 (.612 win%) with a 104 ERA+. After that he bounced around for six years and was largely a punching bag - an 81 ERA+ (meaning that after adjusting for park factors his ERA was nearly 20% higher than the league average). He had a great Series in 1957, beating the Yankees three times. The Yankees took their revenge the next year, beating Burdette twice, including in game 7. There is no rational explanation for Burdette receiving nearly three times the HOF support Guidry did.
Dave Stewart received more HOF votes than Guidry over the last two years Guidry was on the ballot (2001 and 2002). He was a 20 game winner for four straight years for the great A's teams of the late '80s/early '90s. Aside from those four years he was a .500 pitcher with a higher than average ERA, never winning more than 12 games in a season. He was a good post-season pitcher, going 10-6, but was only 2-4 in the World Series. In what universe does Dave Stewart receive as many votes for the Hall as Ron Guidry?
Mickey Lolich received 25.5% of the vote in 1988 and topped 10% seven times. He had a great World Series in '68, winning three games and beating the great Gibson in game seven. He was considered one of the best pitchers in baseball in '71 and '72 (2nd and 3rd place Cy Young finishes) but at no other time. Take away those two years and he was barely a .500 pitcher even though he pitched for a Tigers team that averaged nearly 90 wins a season during his peak from '64 to '73. During his prime from '64 to '73 he had a .578 winning percentage for a Tigers franchise that had an average winning percentage of .550 over that period, displaying an almost Blyleven-like tendency to perform to the level of his team. In a rational world Guidry would outpoll Lolich in HOF balloting by a significant multiple.
Don Newcombe received 15.3% of the HOF vote in 1980 and topped 10% three other years. He anchored the pitching staff for the Boys of Summer in Brooklyn for 5 1/2 years between 1949 and 1956 (losing 2 1/2 years to the Army), winning 112 and losing only 48 with a 3.41 ERA (119 ERA+) during that span. He then went 37-42 over the last four years of his career to finish with a 149-90 record and 3.56 ERA. Newk was a great pitcher for a great team for 5 1/2 years, but is he more deserving of induction to the Hall than Ron Guidry?
Roy Face topped 10% seven times. He was probably the premier relief pitcher in the National League for five years in the late '50s/early '60s. He went 18-1 in 1959, but was a sub-.500 pitcher other than that. The Yankees pounded the crap out of him in the 1960 World Series, his only post-season appearance. Excuse that last statement - Roy Face was a great relief pitcher. But he wasn't Ron Guidry and there is no earthly explanation for why he routinely topped 10% in the HOF vote while Guidry never did.
Wilbur Wood received 6.3% of the vote in 1987. For four years in the early '70s he was the knuckleballing Iron Horse for the White Sox, averaging 22.5 wins and over 340 innings pitched per season. His career record was 164-156 with a 113 ERA+.
I loved Sparky Lyle, and have no problem with him getting 13.1 of the vote. Same for Elston Howard - great catcher for great Yankee teams, so 20.7% of the HOF seems reasonable? But can anyone explain why Guidry would receive significantly less support than either Lyle or Howard?
Johnny Sain - 34% of the vote in 1975. 139 career wins. .545 winning percentage. 106 ERA+. Truly mystifying.
Allie "Superchief" Reynolds finished at 25% or above for eight straight years, topping out at 33.6%. In many ways his stats are similar, though not as good, as Guidry's. What explains the vast disparity in their HOF votes? No disrespect to the Superchief, because I think he deserved every HOF vote he got, maybe more. Hell, I wouldn't be offended if they inducted Reynolds, Raschi and Lopat en masse - that rotation won five straight World Series! I just can't understand how Allie could get more than a third of the vote and Guidry never even hit double digits.
Johnny Vander Meer twice finished just shy of 30%. 119-121 career record. But apparently two straight no-hitters not only trumps a decade's worth of pitching pre-eminence in the American League, but trumps it handily.
Don Larsen topped 10% three times. He was 81-91 in his career, but was a Baseball God one afternoon in October 1956.
Bobo Newsom's HOF vote history is almost identical to Guidry's - an average of about 6% per year. Newsom's big claim to fame is that he led the league in losses four times. Bobo Newsom. Just incredible...Bobo Newsom? (Seriously, click here and look at Newsom's record and consider how amazing it is that HOF voters consider him the equal of Ron Guidry)
Bucky Walters got 23.7% of the vote in 1968. He was arguably the best pitcher in baseball in 1939 and 1940, but look at the record - does he deserve triple the HOF support as Ron Guidry?
Mel Harder received 25.4% of the vote in 1964. He was a damn good pitcher for the Indians for about eight years in the 1930's, but...
Terry Moore received 11.7% of the vote in 1964. I'm a pretty big baseball fan, but who the hell was Terry Moore?
Guidry's Extraordinary "Big Game" Record
And as if all that weren't enough, Guidry pitched six September games against the other contenders in these five pennant races and his line reads 6-0, 50.1 innings, 1.97 ERA.
Is there really anything else to be said? I could recount the back-to-back two-hit shutouts of the Red Sox in '78. I could of course do an entire post on Guidry's victory in the one-game playoff at Fenway in '78, which many consider the greatest game ever played. And of course the post-season meant more of the same from Guidry: 5-2 with a 3.02 ERA in ten starts (eight of which the Yankees won). In the World Series Guidry was even better: 3-1 in four starts with a 1.69 ERA. Of his four WS starts, two were complete games. He pitched seven innings or more in each start and surrendered two runs or less in each.
We'll compare Guidry's extraordinary September and October success with some of the other great pitchers of the last 50 years, including certain pitchers with "big game" reputations who experienced considerable difficulties in September in the midst of pennant races.
The Best Big Game Pitcher Of His Generation
I know, it's a bold statement. If you're a big-league pitcher, there is not a more coveted title or reputation. It is the central argument for Curt Schilling's case for the Hall of Fame. It is no small part of Jack Morris's case for the Hall. It is a perfectly appropriate factor to consider in measuring the qualifications of a pitcher for the Hall.
I fear however that the sportswriters who vote for the Hall of Fame have overlooked Guidry's record as a big game pitcher, and have forgotten that big games take place not only in October but in September as well, when pennants and division championships are won and lost. And it turns out that success in October is not always joined with success in the heat of pennant races. There are pitchers with great post-season accomplishments who stumbled in the heat of pennant races, and others who consistently elevated their performance in pennant races but stumbled in October. And then there are pitchers like Ron Guidry, who were great in both months and seemed to rise to the occasion whenever the stakes were highest.
Ron Guidry participated in five pennant races with the Yankees between 1977 and 1985 where a spot in the post-season hung in the balance (there was nothing at stake for the Yankees in September in the strike interrupted '81 season because they already had a playoff spot locked up by virtue of leading the division when the strike occurred in mid-June)*. I've defined a "pennant race" as any season in which (i) a team was within five games of first place (or a wild-card spot) at some point in September prior to mathematical elimination, and/or (ii) were leading the division (or wild card race) at some point in September but with a lead of five games or less, and (iii) the pitcher at issue made at least one start when the race was within 5 games.
As any baseball fan can tell you, these September games are big when your team is in the race and time is running short. Sometimes they can even feel as big or bigger than post-season games. Guidry's record during these five pennant races was quite simply astounding. Only one other pitcher during the post-WW II era can arguably claim equivalence. This consistent and amazing success in tight pennant races is perhaps the most compelling argument for Guidry's inclusion in the Hall, relatively brief career notwithstanding. Let's look at the record.
Ron Guidry made 30 starts in September during these pennant races. He won 26 of them.
Let me repeat that: Ron Guidry won 26 of 30 September starts in the five pennant races in which he participated. That's not 26 of 30 DECISIONS (although Guidry was 26-4 in those 30 starts), and I don't mean that the YANKEES won 26 of the 30 games Guidry started. I mean that Ron Guidry was the winning pitcher in 26 of the 30 starts he made in September in the midst of tight pennant races.
Let's put that in some perspective. Only two pitchers in the last 50 plus years have even approached 26 wins in 30 starts during the course of a regular season: Denny McClain in 1968 and Bob Welch in 1990. McClain had a stretch of 26 wins in 32 starts (and 31 in 38) during his historic 31 win season in 1968. Welch had a stretch of 26 wins over the the last 31 starts of his historic 27 win season for the A's in 1990. In other words, take a pitcher on his way to a dream season of historic success, in which he'll win more games in a season than anyone has in decades, put a hard hitting team on its way to a World Series championship behind him, and you may get something close to 26 wins in 30 starts.
Let's put it another way. Koufax never came close in any comparable stretch of consecutive starts, either in a single season or across seasons. Gibson's best streak in his incredible '68 season: 19 in 24. Pedro's best: 21 wins in 26 starts during his 23-4 season in 1999. Guidry won 23 of 30 starts during the hottest stretch of his great 1978 season. Clemens had a stretch of 21 games in 1985 before experiencing his 5th loss or no-decision. Ford won 16 of 20 starts in 1961. Gooden's longest stretch without more than 4 non-wins in his 24-4 season of 1985 was 18 starts.
None of this is to say that the September Guidry was better than Koufax or Gibson or these other great pitchers. Rather, it is to illustrate the sheer improbability of anyone winning 26 of 30 starts under any set of circumstances. In a game where a fatefully placed pebble can turn the course of a World Series, as it did in 1960, events outside the control of any pitcher can serve to frustrate the efforts of even the greatest. And yet in 30 starts across five Septembers even chance could rarely thwart Ron Guidry.
We'll look at Guidry's glorious Septembers in the next post, and compare his record in the crucible of September pennant races to the records of the other great pitchers of the last 50 years. I hope that the Veterans Committee of the Hall of Fame will agree that Guidry's pennant race indomitability puts to rest any question of his qualifications for the Hall.
Here is the game log of Gator's 30 September starts in the years the Yankees were contending for the A.L. East title:
_________________
* Guidry also participated in the '88 race in the A.L. East, making the last five starts of his career, going 1-1 with a 5.18 ERA. The analyses to follow will focus on September performance in pennant races during which the pitchers were arguably in their prime, and will exclude past-their-prime Septembers unless their performance was exceptional. So, for example, Randy Johnson's September 2007 with Arizona and Tom Seaver's September 1986 with Boston are not reflected in their September statistics.
Compare Gator to Drysdale and Bunning
Don Drysdale and Jim Bunning each had a significantly shorter career than Don Sutton and therefore offer a better basis for comparison to Guidry. Neither ranks particularly high in terms of career numbers by Hall of Fame standards: Bunning won 224 games, Drysdale 209. Each led the league in victories once, strikeouts three times and innings pitched twice. Neither ever led their league in ERA, winning percentage or complete games. Drysdale won 20 games twice, Bunning once - neither total particularly impressive in an era in which Spahn, Marichal, Jenkins, Koufax and others routinely posted 20-win seasons.
Although neither pitcher was considered the equal of Ford or Koufax, each was durable, reliable and sometimes spectacular. Bunning pitched the first perfect game in the National League in the 20th century (Koufax would pitch the 2nd the following year). Drysdale tossed a record six consecutive shutouts in 1968, breaking Walter Johnson's record for consecutive scoreless innings in the process. Drysdale and Bunning didn't flaunt the annual win totals or sub-2.00 ERA's of some of their contemporaries, but while Spahn was finally stepping aside and Gibson, Marichal, and Seaver just beginning to hit their stride, Drysdale and Bunning finished 1-2 in wins in the major leagues from 1957 to 1966 by averaging approximately 17 wins a season.
The following are Drysdale's, Bunning's, Guidry's and Sutton's statistics for their respective peak periods (11 years in Bunning's case, 10 for Sutton, and 9 for Drysdale and Guidry):
The records are very similar in many respects. The adjusted ERAs are particularly similar, with Sutton ranking last (despite having the best nominal ERA). Guidry actually leads in average wins per season with 17.77 (it should be noted that 1981 was a strike season limited to 108 games, or two-thirds of a full regular season, and Guidry's 154 wins are therefore divided by 8.66 in arriving at his average). Drysdale averaged 17.66 wins per season, Bunning 16.73 and Sutton 16.4.
Guidry compiled his impressive win total despite making significantly fewer starts than the others, a function of having pitched almost exclusively in a five-man rotation rather than the four-man rotation prevalent during the 50's and 60's. Drysdale and Bunning each averaged more than 36 starts per season, or approximately six per year more than Guidry. Guidry, however, won 57% of his starts compared to 46.4% for Drysdale and 45.4% for Bunning. Guidry's percentage of wins per start, like his .697 winning percentage, ranks with the best in baseball history.
Drysdale's and Bunning's peak periods, like Guidry's, comprised the bulk of their careers. Neither compiled win totals that necessarily merit a Hall of Fame nod (as evidenced by the fact nine pitchers in the post-1920 period have higher win totals than Bunning's 224 and have not been inducted into the Hall). It is apparent that Bunning and Drysdale earned elevation to the Hall on the basis of their excellence during their peak years of production. It is also apparent that their peak years, however outstanding, were not as good as Guidry's. Guidry had more 20-win seasons and led the league in more major pitching categories (i.e., wins, winning percentage, ERA, strikeouts, complete games and shutouts) than either Drysdale or Bunning.
A review of the Hall of Fame roster reveals that there are three paths to the Hall: a long career marked by the attainment of historical statistical achievements (i.e., Sutton, Niekro), an abbreviated career that despite its relative brevity establishes the player as one of the greatest of all-time (i.e., Koufax) or a sustained period of eight to twelve years during which a player is fairly regarded as among the very best of his contemporaries (Drysdale, Bunning, Catfish Hunter, Bruce Sutter). Guidry's performance over the period from 1977 to 1985, a period during which he was unquestionably the premier pitcher in the American League, qualifies him for elevation to the Hall of Fame.
The Sportswriters Loved Him At The Time
As much as the sportswriters have forgotten Ron Guidry when it comes to their Hall of Fame ballots, they seemed to love him when he was active. They couldn't stop lavishing awards and praise on Ron, to an extent reserved almost exclusively for Hall of Famers.
The following is a table of career Cy Young vote shares, which are simply the sum of the percentages of the Cy Young votes received by a player each year. For instance, if a pitcher receives 20% of the Cy Young votes one year and 12% the next, his Cy Young vote share for the two years is 0.32. If he wins the Cy Young Award unanimously the third year, his career Cy Young vote shares jumps to 1.32.
The Best Win% for a 150 Win Stretch
I chose a period covering 150 wins for a few reasons. First, it's the unofficial minimum number of wins for a starting pitcher who hopes to make the Hall (Dizzy Dean has the fewest wins of any Hall of Famer starter with precisely 150). Secondly, it's a number of wins that generally represents a period of seven to nine seasons for most elite pitchers, a duration the Hall of Fame has generally deemed sufficient if excellence can be maintained for that period.
As one can see, this list is chock full of Hall of Famers and sure-to-be Hall of Famers like Maddux, Clemens and Martinez. The only pitchers on this list who have been rejected by the Hall are Guidry and Gooden.
The Curious Case of Bert Blyleven
Jack Morris and Bert Blyleven are both making serious bids for the Hall of Fame. Blyleven polled 63% of the vote last year and has the kind of momentum that should take him across the 75% goal line in the next few years. Morris got 44% last year in his tenth year of eligibility, which is about where Blyleven was two years ago in his tenth year of eligibility. Morris appears to have established a clear foothold in the 40s, a position of strength in Hall of Fame voting that almost always leads to induction (by the veterans committee if not the baseball writers).
To be blunt, it is positively absurd that Blyleven and Morris are on the fasttrack to Cooperstown while Guidry has already washed out. Let me explain why.
Let's begin with an analysis of the peak years. Conveniently, each pitcher had a nine-year period of peak productivity, after which each experienced a precipitous dropoff in performance and consistency. Morris and Blyleven each had two years following their peak period where they approached, but did not equal, their peak period performance, but in each case these two years occurred in the midst of a marked decline. Here are the numbers for their respective peak periods:
The first thing that leaps off the above table is the fact that Blyleven has the best ERA and ERA+ but a distinctly worse winning percentage than either Morris or Guidry. I'm sure the immediate reaction of most is along the lines of "sure, Guidry was pitching for perennial pennant winners, Morris was pitching for good but not great Tiger teams in the '80s and Blyleven was saddled with some terrible Twins and Rangers teams." But the record shows something quite different. The Yankees weren't as consistently good during this period as many recall, and the teams Morris and Blyleven pitched for were much better than one might assume.
Guidry's teams had a .575 winning percentage during his peak years, Morris's teams had a .554 winning percentage and Blyleven's a .514 winning percentage. However, each of these figures includes the contributions of the pitchers we're examining. We should be looking at their records without the contribution of our pitchers in order to assess the relative strength of these teams. After subtracting the won-loss records of our pitchers we see that Guidry's teams had a .552 winning percentage when he didn't get the decision, Morris's teams had a .540 winning percentage and Blyleven's teams a .509 winning percentage.
These records confirm that Guidry did indeed pitch for the best teams and Blyleven the worst, but the differences in these team records don't begin to explain the vast disparity in the winning percentages of our three pitchers. Quite simply, Guidry's record was 26.5% better than his team's, Morris's record was 13.9% better, and Blyleven's was 5.5% better.
There is the conviction among sportswriters and commentators that Blyleven was a "hard luck" pitcher, as if a black cloud followed him from the Twins to Texas to the Pirates to the Indians and back to the Twins and finally the Angels, and it rained on poor Bert steadily for 22 years across nearly 700 career starts and 5000 innings. But an examination of Bert's record shows that he had his share of luck, he just never knew what to do with it.
It is true that the Twins were the essence of mediocrity after winning a division title in Blyleven's rookie year, but Blyleven's record was mediocre right along with them. After leaving Minnesota after the 1975 season Blyleven spent the next four years with Texas and Pittsburgh teams that averaged more than 90 wins a season and provided Blyleven with better than average run support, the net effect of which on Blyleven's record was...more mediocrity. He averaged only 12 wins a season despite making an average of 33 starts a year for some of the best teams in baseball, and while his teams played .560 ball during this period Bert managed only a .545 winning percentage. Bert's winning percentage might have been substantially worse, too, but for the fact that the 1979 World Series winning Pirates team had an astounding 13 comebacks in games where Blyleven left the game behind, thereby saving Bert from an additional 13 losses!
After Bert's peak period he pitched another 12 seasons, winning 139 and losing 122 for a .533 winning percentage. The astute reader will notice that this winning percentage is only slightly lower than during Bert's alleged peak period. However, Bert's ERA during this period was 3.80, which tranlates to an ERA+ of 108 as compared to the 131 ERA+ during his peak years in the '70s. He won 10 games or fewer in half of those 12 seasons and had a .500 record or worse in five seasons. As I mentioned earlier, Bert had two excellent seasons in the midst of these 12 years of drought, going 19-7 in 1984 for a Cleveland team that was bad but provided Blyleven with excellent run support, and 17-5 for a good Angels team in 1989 that also provided excellent run support that year.
The Cy Young voting during Blyleven's career suggests that Bert is held in far greater esteem by today's HOF voters than he was by those who cast their ballots for the Cy Young award during his career. In 22 seasons, in 16 of which he pitched more than 200 innings, Bert received votes for the Cy Young award in only four years, and received serious consideration in only one year - 1984. His career Cy Young award shares totalled 0.45, as compared to Guidry's 1.91 in a career barely half as long (Morris had a 0.73 shares).
Blyleven was a prime example of a pitcher who was at his very best in situations in which the game was not on the line and tended to pitch worse in critical situations. A host of situational statistics confirm this, and the striking statistical contrast with Morris in those situational statistics explains how Blyleven could have had a much better ERA than Morris but a distinctly inferior record.
Blyleven, like Sutton and Niekro, amassed impressive career totals over a lengthy career. Unlike Sutton and Niekro, however, Blyleven never demonstrated that he could be a consistent winner while pitching for average or good teams. Despite reservations about Sutton's and Niekro's Hall of Fame qualifications, I can understand how a reasonable person could favor their inclusion. Blyleven's election, however, would be truly troubling, and even perverse in view of Guidry's dismissal by HOF voters. If Blyleven makes it, the Hall of Fame should take a second look at pitchers like Tommy John and Jim Kaat.
Compare Gator to Don Sutton
Don Sutton won 324 games in his career for the Dodgers, Astros, Brewers, Athletics and Angels. He was somewhat overshadowed during the '70's by other great National League pitchers - Gibson, Seaver, and Jenkins in the early and mid-70's; Carlton and J.R. Richard in the late '70's. He never won a Cy Young Award but received votes each year from 1972 to 1976, finishing as high as 3rd in 1976. His Cy Young career award shares (i.e., the sum of the percentages of the Cy Young vote he received) is 0.43, consisting of voting shares of 21% in 1976, 10% in 1974, 6% in 1973, 5% in 1972 and 1% in 1975.
Sutton's prime was 1971 to 1980. Prior to 1971 Sutton was a promising but very erratic pitcher for the Dodgers, winning 66 and losing 73 over the five year period from 1966 to 1970 with an ERA of 3.45 (approximately 5% worse than the league average during the pitching dominated years of the late '60's). Sutton blossomed in 1971, going 17-12 with a 2.54 ERA, and proceeded to become a consistent winner for the Dodgers during the 1970's. Here are Sutton's statistics for the decade period 1971 to 1980 and Guidry's for the period 1977 to 1985 (including the strike shortened, 108 game 1981 season).
Sutton left the Dodgers after 1980 and began a peripatetic stretch of nine years, moving from Houston to Milwaukee to Oakland and then the Angels, before returning to L.A. for a valedictory season in 1988. Over these nine years Sutton won 94 and lost 81 (a .537 winning percentage) and had a 3.71 ERA (which translates to a 102 ERA+, about two percent better than the league average).
Don Sutton is in the Hall of Fame because he won 324 games, an outstanding achievement that I would never presume to minimize nor dismiss. But it is notable that nearly half of those career victories were won when Sutton was plainly not a Hall of Fame caliber pitcher and was either struggling to learn his craft early in his career or gamely hanging on by using guile and a redoubtable competitive drive to remain at the major league level long after most have retired.
While the standards for induction to the Hall of Fame are necessarily subjective and varied, it is safe to say that in the broadest sense we consider Hall of Famers to be simply the best baseball players of all time. And yet it is obvious that Sutton, for all his achievements, was never considered the best pitcher of his era, or even the best in his league at any given time. It is also obvious that even at his best Sutton was never the equal of Ron Guidry. If Sutton's sole qualification for the Hall of Fame is his tremendous number of career wins, then one must concede that among the subjective standards by which Hall of Famers are judged is an ironic and dubious regard for sustained mediocrity.
I do not mean to demean Don Sutton or argue that he is unworthy of the Hall. Sutton is far from alone as a player whose Hall of Fame credentials are based more on longevity than excellence. My purpose is only to suggest that excellence sustained over the better part of a decade is at least as worthy of consideration for the Hall of Fame as lofty career statistical achievements compiled over careers of 20 years or more during which a player was too frequently merely average or slightly above average. The Hall of Fame voters seem to agree in principle, as evidenced by Koufax and Dean and Greenberg and Kiner, among others, but in practice the Guidrys still stand at a distinct disadvantage to the Suttons in Hall of Fame balloting.
Did You Know That Ron Guidry...
...is the only pitcher in modern baseball history (i.e., post-1920) to lead the major leagues in wins over a ten-year span and lead his own league in ERA and be rejected by the Hall of Fame?
Yes, it's true. In fact, you can lead one of the major leagues in wins, ERA and strikeouts over a ten-year span and get about the same number of votes for the Hall of Fame as the great Bobo Newsom. Ron Guidry is proof of that astounding fact.
Ron Guidry won 163 games from 1977 to 1986, had a 3.23 ERA and 1623 strikeouts.
Here are the major league leaders from 1977 to 1986 in wins, ERA and strikeouts:
Wins
Ron Guidry 163
Steve Carlton 155
Phil Niekro 149
Joe Niekro 145
Jack Morris 144
ERA (min. 1600 innings)
Steve Rogers 3.10
Steve Carlton 3.13
John Candelaria 3.14
Nolan Ryan 3.19
Ron Guidry 3.23
Strikeouts
Nolan Ryan 2192
Steve Carlton 1929
Ron Guidry 1623
Phil Niekro 1594
Bert Blyleven 1544
The astute reader will note that all four pitchers ahead of Guidry in the ERA list were N.L. pitchers (actually, Candelaria and Ryan both pitched in the A.L. as well, but spent the bulk of the ten-year period in the N.L.). National League ERAs naturally tend to be lower (because of the absence of the designated hitter), and therefore Guidry's achievement is all the more impressive (in fact, his ERA+ was lower than the N.L. ERA+s of any of the four pitchers ahead of him on the above ERA list).
Who have been the other pitchers to lead the major leagues in wins and their own league in ERA over a decade span? I'm glad you asked. There have been ten. Here's the list: Lefty Grove, Carl Hubbell, Hal Newhouser, Warren Spahn, Juan Marichal, Tom Seaver, Jim Palmer, Steve Carlton, Roger Clemens and Greg Maddux. The first eight are already Hall of Famers; the last two, Clemens and Maddux, will join them the moment the votes are tabulated in their first year of eligibility (unless Clemens gets the McGwire treatment).
Strangely, the eleventh man to accomplish this feat not only failed to make the Hall of Fame, he never even came close. Which raises the question: what did Ron Guidry ever do to offend those who cast their ballots for the Hall of Fame?
