What About Quisenberry?

[DoubleX]

I'm really not that against Sutter's election. I do believe the very, very best of the closers should make it, and Sutter is definitely on that top level (he's just not first IMO).

My biggest problem with Sutter's election (other than being elected before Gossage) is what about Quisenberry? If Sutter is in, why not Quisenberry? Quisenberry isn't credited with creating a pitch, but he was at least as good as Sutter, if not better. Yet Quisenberry was dropped on his first try and Sutter is now elected.

Does anyone else feel that this is a total disjustice to Quisenberry and that writers should be ashamed of their collective ignorance?

[The Dude]

Yes, I agree that Quisenberry should have been in before Sutter, as he is the better pitcher. Was Quisenberry as flashy? No. But he played played just as long as Sutter and got the job done better, but with less strikeouts.

Before either of them, I believe Gossage deserves it.

My HOF-Worthy relief pitchers as so:
1.Hoyt Wilhelm*
2.Mariano Rivera
3.Goose Gossage
4.Rollie Fingers*
5.Dan Quisenberry
6.Bruce Sutter*
7.Trevor Hoffman
8.Tom Henke
9.John Wetteland
10.John Franco
11.Sparky Lyle
12.Dennis Eckersley*
13.Lee Smith

[DoubleX]

I like that list a lot, though I might put Lyle ahead of Franco.

[Chisox]

Quiz is in my personal Hall of Fame in the Closers Wing.

The 21 in mine (although subject to change)
Hoyt Wilhelm
Dennis Eckersley
Rich Gossage
Rollie Fingers
Ron Reed
John Hiller
JOHN FRANCO
Stu Miller
Lee Smith
Jesse Orosco
Tug McGraw
Bruce Sutter
Dan Quisenberry
MARIANO RIVERA
TREVOR HOFFMAN
Jeff Reardon
Robb Nen
John Wetteland
Elroy Face
Tom Henke
BILLY WAGNER

[Captain Cold Nose]

Quiz is in my personal Hall of Fame in the Closers Wing.

The 21 in mine (although subject to change)
Hoyt Wilhelm
Dennis Eckersley
Rich Gossage
Rollie Fingers
Ron Reed
John Hiller
JOHN FRANCO
Stu Miller
Lee Smith
Jesse Orosco
Tug McGraw
Bruce Sutter
Dan Quisenberry
MARIANO RIVERA
TREVOR HOFFMAN
Jeff Reardon
Robb Nen
John Wetteland
Elroy Face
Tom Henke
BILLY WAGNER

What do you think abut Firpo Marberry and Johnny Murphy?

[Chisox]

What do you think abut Firpo Marberry and Johnny Murphy?

I don't know. It's really difficult to compare old time closers to modern closers. I think I had Murphy just on the outside. I'll have to re-check Marberry. When I compiled the list, I limited to those averaging under 5IP/G to make it easier to compare so I'm not even sure if Marberry qualified.

[KCGHOST]

I though Quisenberry was great the first half of his career. His career numbers and Sutter's are almost identical.

IP BR/9 ERA Games

Sutter 1042 10.37 2.83 661
Quisenberry 1043 10.64 2.76 674

They both pitched for 12 years.

Marberry, who is worthy of consideration, suffers from several guys in his era being better and not in the HoF. See Eddie Rommel.

There is nothing about Murphy's career that says HoF.

[Chisox]

I though Quisenberry was great the first half of his career. His career numbers and Sutter's are almost identical.

IP BR/9 ERA Games

Sutter 1042 10.37 2.83 661
Quisenberry 1043 10.64 2.76 674

They both pitched for 12 years.

Marberry, who is worthy of consideration, suffers from several guys in his era being better and not in the HoF. See Eddie Rommel.

There is nothing about Murphy's career that says HoF.

Well, he did hold the retro-active all-time saves record for a while until Elroy Face came along, but other than that...

[Captain Cold Nose]

I though Quisenberry was great the first half of his career. His career numbers and Sutter's are almost identical.

IP BR/9 ERA Games

Sutter 1042 10.37 2.83 661
Quisenberry 1043 10.64 2.76 674

They both pitched for 12 years.

Marberry, who is worthy of consideration, suffers from several guys in his era being better and not in the HoF. See Eddie Rommel.

There is nothing about Murphy's career that says HoF.

Thanks. I was merely asking about them, mind you. Not endorsing either of them. I'll check out Rommel.

[Barnstormer]

I though Quisenberry was great the first half of his career. His career numbers and Sutter's are almost identical.

IP BR/9 ERA Games

Sutter 1042 10.37 2.83 661
Quisenberry 1043 10.64 2.76 674

They both pitched for 12 years.

You know what? Take off fellow submariner Kent Tekulve's last three years or so, and his record looks alot like that.

[KCGHOST]

You know what? Take off fellow submariner Kent Tekulve's last three years or so, and his record looks alot like that.

This is not exactly a ringing set of endorsements of the Sutter election.

[Barnstormer]

This is not exactly a ringing set of endorsements of the Sutter election.

Yeah, relievers may be the toughest position to judge "greatness" on just based on stats. I'm never sure which stats should get weighed more heavily. Because you could make cases that a lot of his peers aren't really statistically much worse than Sutter - Tekulve, Lyle, McGraw, Quiz - especially if you just take their career up to age 35 when Sutter quit - and they were all booted off on their first ballot (except Sparky who lasted a few years). I guess contemporary opinion counts for a lot.

[DoubleX]

Yeah, relievers may be the toughest position to judge "greatness" on just based on stats. I'm never sure which stats should get weighed more heavily. Because you could make cases that a lot of his peers aren't really statistically much worse than Sutter - Tekulve, Lyle, McGraw, Quiz - especially if you just take their career up to age 35 when Sutter quit - and they were all booted off on their first ballot (except Sparky who lasted a few years). I guess contemporary opinion counts for a lot.

Sutter has a couple of things that help differentiate him, even though statistically he's not much different than the other guys.

1) Credited with the splitter
2) Regarded as more dominant at best than the other guys
3) Pitched for high-profile teams (Chicago and then very good Cardinals teams)
4) Recognizable look (which some of the others have as well)

[Fuzzy Bear]

Sutter has a couple of things that help differentiate him, even though statistically he's not much different than the other guys.

1) Credited with the splitter
2) Regarded as more dominant at best than the other guys
3) Pitched for high-profile teams (Chicago and then very good Cardinals teams)
4) Recognizable look (which some of the others have as well)

These are images, somewhat. Sutter was the best reliever in the NL from 1979-84, but Quisenberry was the best reliever in the AL from 1980-85. Sutter played for a team that was on national cable TV, but Quisenberry was an integral part of the Royals' 1980 pennant winning team and the Royals' 1985 World Championship team.

I really don't consider "inventing" a pitch to be a credential for being in the HOF. Methods, to me, aren't a substitute for results.

Quiz was a better pitcher than Sutter, IMO. I'm not a fan of Sutter's election, so Quiz isn't an overwhelming candidate, but I'm not a big fan of relievers in the HOF in general. Sutter is in, and Quiz is not, because (A) Sutter was much more of a power pitcher, and (B) Sutter won a Cy Young Award. Whether or not either Sutter or Quiz deserved one is a matter of debate, and it depends on whether or not you view relievers as worthy of the Cy Young Award, but the fact that Sutter won one and Quiz didn't made him more memorable.

Quiz was a great guy, and a guy I would LIKE to see in the HOF, but for the precedent it would set. If Quiz, why not Sparky Lyle? Lyle won a Cy Young Award, and was a full-time star reliever before it was cool. If Lyle, why not Tug McGraw? McGraw was a guy who COULD have been a starter. If McGraw, why not Mike Marshall, who was a heavy duty reliever, who also won a Cy Young Award? We could work this down to where we ask "If Don McMahon, why not Frank Linzy? Why not Lindy McDaniel?" I'm not a big fan of this downward spiral.

[henrich]

Name H-Factor Era
1. Dennis Eckersley 16801 6
2. Rollie Fingers 14114 6
3. Mariano Rivera 12942 8
4. Lee Smith 12291 6
5. Trevor Hoffman 11769 8
6. John Franco 10645 7
7.Rich Goose Gossage 10552 6
8. Bruce Sutter 10311 6
9. Randy Myers 9889 7
10. Jeff Reardon 9312 6
11 Jose Mesa 8863 8
12. Sparky Lyle 8853 6
13. Hoyt Wilhelm 8775 5 (Best in his era)
14. Dan Quisenberry 8709 6
15. John Wetteland 8274 6
16. Billy Wagner 8244 8
17. Tom Henke 7806 6
18. Johnny Murphy 7703 3 (Best in his era)
19. Roberto Hernandez 7645 8
20. Rick Aguilera 7592 7
21. Robb Nen 7343 7
22. Tom Gordon 7342 8
23. Todd Jones 7259 8
24. Armando Benitez 7252 8
25. Steve Bedrosian 7201 6
26. Tug McGraw 7199 6
27. Troy Percival 7086 8
28. Doug Jones 7084 7
29. Jason Isringhausen 7058 8
30. Dave Righetti 6902 6
31. Roy Face 6732 5
32. Mike Marshall 6665 5
33. Rod Beck 6654 7

Here's your downward spiral you are talking about. I bolded the guys in the Hall of Fame and then I italicized guys that should be in the Hall when induction comes for them and I underlined Smith because he's garnering 40% of the vote, but not in yet. I italicized quis, Lyle and Mcgraw because you referenced them.

The reference numbers of course is the H-Factor for what's it worth to you.