Hall of Fame Voters Really Made Love to the Pooch with This Closer Situation
One of the hallmarks of the annual Hall of Fame debates is the comparison to players already enshrined. It can be a very good exercise in determining the merits of a particular player, especially because after so many years, there are now a lot of players in the Hall of Fame. There are plenty of players at every single position. There are pitchers. There are power hitters, average hitters. There are great fielders. One area where the present Hall of Fame lacks in providing a good comparison is the Closer situation.
As Wendy Thurm’s post indicated in evaluating Lee Smith’s candidacy*, it is difficult to judge because the only full-time relief pitchers in the Hall of Fame are Rollie Fingers, Goose Gossage and Bruce Sutter. Hoyt Wilhem is not an apt comparison, having retired in 1972 with 500 more innings pitched than even Rollie Fingers. Wendy reached the conclusion that Smith was better than Sutter, not as good as Fingers and Gossage, and put Smith just on the other side of the Hall of Fame. It feels like the right call, but if Sutter is in the Hall what exactly is the standard for relief pitchers?
Taking a look at only Fingers, Sutter, and Gossage is not very instructive, so I expanded the parameters for comparison to include Smith, a likely first ballot player in Mariano Rivera as well as Trevor Hoffman, whose candidacy is not really clear at this point.
The era that the current members of the Hall played in was different than the current players with Smith serving as sort of a bridge between the two. I wanted to compare their innings totals so I took a look at each player’s twelve best years (omitting Gossage’s year as a starter) and created a cumulative IP graph.
As you can see, Fingers stands out, followed by Gossage, a small gap, then Sutter and Smith, followed by another gap, and then Rivera and Hoffman. Although Smith definitely compiled a lot of saves, it is not really fair to put him in the modern-day closer group.
Next, I looked at the players’ WAR cumulatively in their twelve best years. I order the WARs in descending order so that the peak would be first. This is what I found:
As you can see, it was Sutter’s peak that appealed to voters as he jumped out to an early lead and then crashed. Gossage tailed off, but remained high with Smith not too far behind. Rivera’s graph shows why he will make the Hall while Hoffman lags well behind.
I decided to take a look at a few other players who have already been dismissed from the ballot or will arrive on the ballot shortly. Leaving in Smith and Hoffman, and adding Billy Wagner, Dan Quisenberry, and Doug Jones, their cumulative WAR graphs look like this.
As you can see, Smith comes out as the clear leader, with Jones, Wagner and Hoffman bunched together and Quisenberry trailing behind. You can have a Hall of Fame that includes Trevor Hoffman, but that Hall of Fame needs to include better players like Lee Smith, and equivalents like Doug Jones and Billy Wagner. It seems too inclusive, yet that is the Hall the writers appear to have created.
Much of this debate would have been avoided if the Hall of Fame had never let Bruce Sutter in based on two exceptional years and a small handful of pretty good years. If Sutter does not get in, Gossage probably does not get the momentum he needs, and if Gossage doesn’t get in, Smith wouldn’t. I am not entirely sure why Fingers made it, but only Fingers and Rivera would make it in along with hybrid players like Eckersley and John Smoltz. I am by no means a small-hall guy, but specialists pitching in at most half of their teams’ games for an inning should be truly exceptional to make the Hall of Fame.
*A few interesting facts about Smith. In the first seven ballots Lee Smith has appeared on beginning in 2003, every single player who finished higher than Smith on the ballot is in the Hall of Fame. If Jeff Bagwell and Jack Morris make the Hall, it will be true for Smith’s first ten ballots. Smith finished higher than Morris on his first seven ballots. Smith held on the All-time save lead for 13 years, longer than Fingers (12), Reardon (1), and Hoffman (5). One more: Smith was on the wrong end of the platoon advantage for 53.88% of his matchups. Rivera (51.27%), Sutter (49.46%), Hoffman (48.19%), Gossage (45.98%), Fingers (43.8%) all lag behind.
13
I’m in a tough position with Smith, because I don’t think he necessarily deserves to be in, but he is also more deserving then people that are already in, or will most likely make it in. personally, I’d put him in, but that’s mainly because he was always a favorite of mine, which is usually enough to push someone over the edge for me.
Great article. Amazing title.
The reliever who belongs in the Hall of Fame, beyond any doubt, is Hoyt Wilhelm, and he was duly elected in 1985. He was an excellent starter for 3 seasons in the middle of his career, but he pitched as many or nearly as many innings in the years when he was a reliever.
His 2254 IP dwarfs the relievers discussed in this article. His 3.06 FIP (2.54 ERA) must be as good or better than those guys, though I haven’t checked.
He was also a good hitter for a reliever (.121 wOBA in 493 PA’s).
Roy Face, a great reliever, is arguably HOF quality for his career, but should definitely have some kind of honorable mention plaque for his 1959 season: 2.70 FIP, 2.60 ERA, 18-1 W-L. I know pitchers wins and losses don’t normally mean much, but 18-1!
Poz did a great bit on the hall, in which it was found that the miserly bbwa led the vet committee to overcompensate with crap … especially the catcher position, which is remarkable since it is so under-represented. I hope that they do not think they have to overcompensate with crap since someone unworthy is in and because the position does not have much representation. That said, Wagner was awesome!
Just look at that Rivera cumulative WAR graph – maybe it’s just because I have a small screen on my netbook, but it looks almost perfectly linear. I’d call him inhuman, but there would probably be more variation between seasons if he actually WAS a machine than there is.
Fingers got in because he was the all time saves leader, and the only man with 300+ saves at the time. Add in many postseason appearances, and he was voted in, but more as a factor of luck, given he pitched when saves first became “important” and was used accordingly. Had he come up 10-15 years later, he would not have made the Hall, and fell into the second tier of all time closers.
Sutter got into the HoF with help from voters giving him credit for inventing (or at least popularizing) the split finger fastball.
He did not get in on statistics alone, so using him as the baseline is a faulty assumption.
It seems like it should be much, much easier to maintain top performance if you know that you are only ever warming up once, and then pitching one inning at the most. Giving modern closers credit for a more effective usage pattern that they have nothing to do with seems out of line, which is why I would be fine with a “just Rivera” reliever selection from here on out. The managers/GMs are the ones who should get the credit, such as it is.
I don’t think an analogous situation is even possible for hitters – there doesn’t appear to be a in-game usage pattern that allows hitters a dramtic boost in their performance relative to what you would see in full-time action (platoon advantage is about it)
On those additional facts – how do Fingers and Gossage end up facing so few lefties compared to the other guys? Was it the pinch-hitting rate during their era?
Sutter may not have made it to the Hall on statistics alone, but you can be sure that future voters will be looking at the statistics when they vote. If Hoffman and Wagner stay on the ballot for multiple years, we are talking about an examination that will be done in 10-15 years, 40 years after Sutter’s prime. Gossage getting in the Hall shortly after Sutter also speaks to voters making comparisons between similar players.
Re: facing fewer lefties
I think Fingers and Gossage faced fewer lefties for the reason you stated regarding pinch hitting being less popular, but it was also not as feasible if a pitcher was going to pitch a couple innings. If a pitcher pitched two innings and let one runner on, he faced seven batters. There are only so many lefties you can stock your roster with, and the pitchers are more likely to face a team’s heart of the order where hitters would not likely be taken out of the game. Smith pitched in both eras, and his PAs against lefties got bigger in the mid to late eighties. I suspect Rivera and Hoffman’s aren’t as big because the cutter and changeup, respectively, neutralized lefties and did not provide as much of an advantage for hitters.
I think Billy Wagner belongs in the Hall of Fame. When you look at pure nastiness, Mariano is his only peer. Had he pitched ~100 more innings, he would have qualified for the ERA+ and K/9 title. His ERA+ was 187(2nd all-time) and his 11.90 K/9 would easily be the best mark in baseball history.
It would just be a shame to me to keep someone out of the Hall when they were clearly this historically great. Had he played two or more years, he might have 500+ saves and his WAR total would only be surpassed by Rivera and possibly Gossage. The guy just belongs.
The perfect linearity of Rivera’s line in the first chart is proof that he’s a robot. I don’t think it’s fair to judge human’s and robots by the same standards.
Lou Whitaker’s career WAR (74) more than doubles all of these closers’ WAR…except Rivera (39). Even adjusting for some of WAR’s deficiencies, it upsets me at how famous a closer can become despite not impacting his team’s performance that much.