Tom Henke

[Baseball Guru]

A lot has been made of Sutter's election and who else should be in...

Quis, Goose, etc have been mentioned but what about Tom Henke?

I never really hear much talk about him but honestly his #'s truely are fantastic!

Great WHIP, great ERA difference, etc... Are his innings total too low?

Just trying to generate some discussion and views on Henke...

[The Dude]

I think Henke's the most all-around underrated reliever (Quiz being the most underrated by the casual fan). Have we ever found out why he retired at the end of one of his best seasons?

[DoubleX]

Great and vastly underrated closer, but the line has to be drawn somewhere, and for me, the line the low IP total for Henke. For me, any reliever who is not Mariano Rivera, has to go at least 1000 innings to make it. Henke was at least three seasons short of making that.

[KCGHOST]

Seems like Henke developed back trouble. To me reliefer, I don't care what his name in, needs a heck of a lot more than a mere 1000 IP's like Sutter.

[J W]

Of my time (Quisenberry was a tad before me), I've always asserted that Henke was the most underrated reliever, and now I would throw John Wetteland in the mix, but Henke remains #1 in my book.

Both of these guys failed to reach 800 career IP and that's what killed their chances I'm sure. As we move forward with our modern closers, these two are where I would draw the line. If a candidate performed and their standards with more endurance (or for a longer time) than Henke and Wetteland (looking at YOU, Billy Wagner), then he would earn my HOF vote no question. Lee Smith and to a lesser extent, Trevor Hoffman have cemented my theoretical vote because of this. I'm hoping Hoffman reaches 900 IP and 500 career saves, which he would do with two more solid, healthy seasons... and that should cement his actual vote with the writers.

Quisenberry doesn't fall in the category of modern-style closer in by book, so he'd have to be looked at in another light. He is however a few years away yet from the Vet Committee vote.

[Aqua]

Henke got hurt (the back injury) and actually "retired" prior to his final season. But it seems he decided that he didn't want to bow out after a subpar season and instead came back for one final year. Since it was a good one, he retired for good at the end of it.

But it's a pity that he got injured. For me, the injury probably puts him just outside the HoF, because his period of dominance wasn't long enough, given his IP totals per season.

[Chadwick]

Both of these guys failed to reach 800 career IP and that's what killed their chances I'm sure. As we move forward with our modern closers, these two are where I would draw the line. If a candidate performed and their standards with more endurance (or for a longer time) than Henke and Wetteland (looking at YOU, Billy Wagner), then he would earn my HOF vote no question.

This sums up my point of view.

[The Commissioner]

I have to also agree with what's been stated here concerning Henke. For me, the problem lies somewhere in the balance between IP, dominance, and save totals. Unfortunately, I have no perfect "formula" worked out concerning this, but in my mind for someone with that relatively few IP, they need to have recorded far more saves and/or have had a few far more dominant seasons over the course of their careers. For example, while Henke does have one more save recorded for his career than Gossage, the 1000+ less innings hinder his serious consideration. Save totals are becoming so gaudy and overinflated these days that a much higher total is needed for serious consideration from this era's closers. The exception would be for someone who had a career such a Rivera's. If Rivera retired today with 379, his complete league dominance and post season heroics would have to ensure him of a spot in Cooperstown. Conversely, does anyone take seriously the candidacy of Jose Mesa, even if he sticks around for long enough to compile 450 saves?

[Cougar]

The IP is the main drawback. Darn post-Eck usage patterns!

Sparkling record in the innings he pitched, though, to be sure.

[The Commissioner]

Sparkling record in the innings he pitched, though, to be sure.

Definitely. I just think he needed either a couple of even greater seasons or a few more seasons at that pace to seriously be considered as a Hall of Famer.

[runningshoes]

Does that mean he's penalized for playing on winning teams?

[leecemark]

--Say what? How is Henke being penalized for being on winning teams. Closers actually should get more opportunities to pitch on a good team than a bad one. Henke's low IP are due to the shortness of his career.
--The other thing that killed him with the writers is he wasn't (as I recall anyway) really as highly regarded as he should have been while active. The BWAA takes the fame part of the Hall of Fame seriously (see the Garvey over Clark discussions). Stats, especially the more modern ones, do get as much attention by the actual voters as they do here.

[runningshoes]

--Say what? How is Henke being penalized for being on winning teams.

I didn't say he was being penalized, I was asking if he was being penalized.

[The Commissioner]

I didn't say he was being penalized, I was asking if he was being penalized.

I don't think he's being penalized. On the contrary, he may not have collected anywhere near as many saves with poor teams and we may not be talking about him now.

[runningshoes]

I don't think he's being penalized. On the contrary, he may not have collected anywhere near as many saves with poor teams and we may not be talking about him now.

I agree, but if he's not needed to come in and protect three run leads, does that cut down on his innings pitched?