Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Tom Glavine and the Hall

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by Captain Cold Nose
    The thread was started in January of 2004. The stat line is accurate for that time.
    Ok...NOW i see.
    "I am not too serious about anything. I believe you have to enjoy yourself to get the most out of your ability."-
    George Brett

    Comment


    • #32
      Does Tom Glavine belong?

      There has been a lot of discussion the past few days about whether or not Tom Glavine deserves election. This is not whether or not he will make it, as it appears he will, like it or not. What do we think?

      I have posted my reasons and number many times, so I will spare everybody the rundown again.

      Let's assume he never pitches another game, so 300 wins won't even factor in.
      1885 1886 1926 1931 1934 1942 1944 1946 1964 1967 1982 2006 2011

      1887 1888 1928 1930 1943 1968 1985 1987 2004 2013

      1996 2000 2001 2002 2005 2009 2012 2014 2015


      The Top 100 Pitchers In MLB History
      The Top 100 Position Players In MLB History

      Comment


      • #33
        Glavine easily qualifies for the HoF. He has five 20 win seasons and 2 Cy Young Awards. He on pace for his sixth 20 win season this year.
        Strikeouts are boring! Besides that, they're fascist. Throw some ground balls - it's more democratic.-Crash Davis

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by digglahhh
          How could he not?

          There is really no legitimate case against him.
          Maybe you've been away, Derek, I'll clue you in. :o

          Thread

          Originally posted by SABR Matt
          Tom Glavine is in no way a top 10 or even top 25 pitcher in the history of left handers. His success, much like Whitey Ford's success is created by a combination of pitching for great team defenses and having a pitching style that fit his ballparks. In the DIPS sense, he does very little to influence the outcomes of his starts. He's just a good solid pitcher who works in better than normal circumstances.
          Tom Glavine and Whitey Ford were merely "good" pitchers.

          Um ok...pass the Kool Aid down this way!!

          Comment


          • #35
            First-Ballot

            Absolutely.
            “I see great things in baseball.”
            Walt Whitman

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by baseballPAP
              Wow csh...another member of your fan club.
              Why is it that you don't ever bother to do anything but search other places for something to steal as your own opinion? I haven't seen you post anything of your own in quite some time, but you never hesitate to attack anyone who posts anything that disagrees with your "new stats suck" approach. Attack, meaning post something someone else said in that effect, or just say I don't want to look at the evidence, so you're obviously wrong.

              BTW....I have Ford and Glavine at #14 and #15 as LHers.
              Theirs is a long-standing feud. Please don't add to it with by trying to dictate how the one you disagree with should post. Even you don't have all the answers.
              Chris, can you please disagree with someone without being mean-spirited?
              Matt, language.
              We have gone over this before. If you don't agree with or like someone, go about their posts in a constructive manner. Just don't let yourselves get worked up over things that aren't worth it at the end of the day.
              The rest of us, who don't feel the need to choose sides but would rather discuss baseball, don't want to hear it.
              Dave Bill Tom George Mark Bob Ernie Soupy Dick Alex Sparky
              Joe Gary MCA Emanuel Sonny Dave Earl Stan
              Jonathan Neil Roger Anthony Ray Thomas Art Don
              Gates Philip John Warrior Rik Casey Tony Horace
              Robin Bill Ernie JEDI

              Comment


              • #37
                ...having a pitching style that fit his ballparks.
                Is that supposed to be a bad thing?

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by baseballPAP
                  Wow csh...another member of your fan club.
                  Why is it that you don't ever bother to do anything but search other places for something to steal as your own opinion? I haven't seen you post anything of your own in quite some time, but you never hesitate to attack anyone who posts anything that disagrees with your "new stats suck" approach. Attack, meaning post something someone else said in that effect, or just say I don't want to look at the evidence, so you're obviously wrong.

                  BTW....I have Ford and Glavine at #14 and #15 as LHers.
                  csh's "fan" club may be bigger than Babe Ruth's
                  Mythical SF Chronicle scouting report: "That Jeff runs like a deer. Unfortunately, he also hits AND throws like one." I am Venus DeMilo - NO ARM! I can play like a big leaguer, I can field like Luzinski, run like Lombardi. The secret to managing is keeping the ones who hate you away from the undecided ones. I am a triumph of quantity over quality. I'm almost useful, every village needs an idiot.
                  Good traders: MadHatter(2), BoofBonser26, StormSurge

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Of course Glavine belongs. 5 20 win seasons, 6 years with era under 3.00, career era + of 120, 2 cy youngs, 9 all star apperences, a WS MVP, and (even though its not suposed to figure into the discussion but he will proabably get 300 wins). He also a very good hitting pitcher with 4 silver sluggers, and a very good fielder even though he has no gold gloves. So yeah he is deffiantly in.
                    go sox.

                    Pigskin-Fever

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      There's nothing to discuss here. The guy has both the counting and quality numbers.
                      Buck O'Neil: The Monarch of Baseball

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by The Big C
                        Is that supposed to be a bad thing?
                        No...it means the Braves were very smart indeed to hire Glavine to pitch for them...they scouted well (as usual) and they put the right man in the right location. But it also means Glavine didn't through his pitching create this wins...his circumstances did.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by Honus Wagner Rules
                          Matt,

                          Have you posted a detailed post against Glavine's HoF induction in a previous thread? If so can you post a link to it? I'd very much would like to read it.
                          No, I haven't actually dedicated a lengthy post to debunking the Glavine myth yet (at least not on the same level as my conversations on Whitey Ford). I'll get around to that shortly, seeing as the conversation seems to be shifting toward what to do with him when he retires.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Not a big Glavine fan at all. But he probably deserves to be in. He was extremely fortunate in many circumstances, but he managed to put up the numbers that should get him in.


                            And Glavine would not be in my top 10 LHP list by any stretch. Maybe top 15, maybe top 20.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              I used to like Glavine, the more I look into his career the more I think SABR Matt might be right about him being a creation of his circumstances. I wish more people would realize the ERA stats really are only slightly better to evaluate pitchers than the triple crown stats are for hitters. I haven't completely incorporated DIPS into my pitcher lists because of lack of resources, but I'll be trying to do so soon.

                              BTW, does anyone know how BP's DERA is calculated? Matt says that Glavine was helped tremendously by his defense and environment, I think that's probably true, but DERA sees Glavine's NRA not getting much help from defense. Does anyone really know exactly how that's calculated?

                              Also, I have CSH on my ignore so I don't even know what he said, but count me in for sure as a member of his "fan club".
                              Last edited by 538280; 06-27-2006, 06:56 PM.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by 538280
                                I used to like Glavine, the more I look into his career the more I think SABR Matt might be right about him being a creation of his circumstances. I wish more people would realize the ERA stats really are only slightly better to evaluate pitchers than the triple crown stats are for hitters. I haven't completely incorporated DIPS into my pitcher lists because of lack of resources, but I'll be trying to do so soon.

                                BTW, does anyone know how BP's DERA is calculated? Matt says that Glavine was helped tremendously by his defense and environment, I think that's probably true, but DERA sees Glavine's NRA not getting much help from defense. Does anyone really know exactly how that's calculated?
                                Chris,

                                EVERY player is a creation of his circumstances!!! To say that Glavine was fortunate to have played with great teams with great defenses, strikes me as rather odd. We have no idea how Glavine would have pitched for inferior teams and inferior defenses. You just CAN'T assume he would have been a mediocre pitcher. Let's assume for argument's sake that Glavine was helped by his teams and defenses. So what? Glavine still had to pitch those games and he still had to win those games. Did it ever occur to you that Glavine was one of the major reasons the Braves were so successful? You are attributing Glavine's success to his team but you attribute none of the Braves success to Glavine and that is completely unfair. And it doesn't matter what Win Shares, PCA, DIPS, DERA, etc., say about Glavine. HoF voters don't give a crap about those metrics. They will look at Glavine's 5-6 20-win seaons, two Cy Youngs, World Series MVP, etc. and vote accordingly.
                                Strikeouts are boring! Besides that, they're fascist. Throw some ground balls - it's more democratic.-Crash Davis

                                Comment

                                Ad Widget

                                Collapse
                                Working...
                                X