Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Rick Reuschel

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

  • Rick Reuschel

    From 1972 to 1991, Rick Reuschel posted a 214-191 record with a 3.37 ERA. A three time All-Star, he was a two time Gold Glove winner, and two Hall of Famers are statistically similar to him: Jim Bunning and Catfish Hunter.

    His numbers might not look too exciting, but one has to remember that he pitched for a lot of bad teams in his career. For example, from 1972 to 1981, during his first tenure with the Cubs, Reuschel had a record of 129-121 while the team as a whole only went 720-833. So, while the team as a whole had a winning percentage of only .463, he had a winning percentage of .516. Also in that time, he led the team in wins six times and ERA four times (when I say he led the team in ERA, I mean among all pitchers with at least 20 starts, except for 1981, when I refer to all pitchers with at least 10 starts).

    Then with the 1985 Pirates - a team that went 57-104, he was the only pitcher on the team with at least 10 wins and the only starter with a winning record, going 14-8 with a 2.27 ERA (which also led the team, among all pitchers with at least two games logged).

    He was again his team's (the Giants) best starter in 1988 and 1989 (although I must give credit where credit's due - Scott Garrelts may have been better than him in 1989), going 19-11 in 1988 and 17-8 in 1989.

    Overall, the teams he played for had a combined record of 1572-1706, and even with that he managed to post a record of 214-191. That's a .528 career winning percentage compared to a team winning percentage of .480. Had he played on better teams throughout his career, his record surely would have been better than it turned into.

    With all that said...should Rick Reuschel be in the Hall of Fame?
    71
    Yes
    7.04%
    5
    No
    85.92%
    61
    Maybe
    7.04%
    5

  • #2
    Reuschel's selection would open the door for literally 15-20 pitchers who have a case if Reuschel has a case.

    If Reuschel, why not . . .

    Orel Hershiser
    Luis Tiant
    Jack Morris
    Dennis Martinez
    Frank Tanana
    Billy Pierce
    Dave McNally
    Mike Cuellar
    Mickey Lolich
    Vida Blue
    Urban Shocker
    Bob Shawkey
    Carl Mays
    Tommy John
    Jim Kaat
    Bert Blyleven
    Tommy Bridges

    How could we object to ANY of these guys if Reuschel gets into the HOF?
    "I do not care if half the league strikes. Those who do it will encounter quick retribution. All will be suspended and I don't care if it wrecks the National League for five years. This is the United States of America and one citizen has as much right to play as another. The National League will go down the line with Robinson whatever the consequences. You will find if you go through with your intention that you have been guilty of complete madness."

    NL President Ford Frick, 1947

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Fuzzy Bear View Post
      Reuschel's selection would open the door for literally 15-20 pitchers who have a case if Reuschel has a case.

      If Reuschel, why not . . .

      Orel Hershiser
      Luis Tiant
      Jack Morris
      Dennis Martinez
      Frank Tanana
      Billy Pierce
      Dave McNally
      Mike Cuellar
      Mickey Lolich
      Vida Blue
      Urban Shocker
      Bob Shawkey
      Carl Mays
      Tommy John
      Jim Kaat
      Bert Blyleven
      Tommy Bridges

      How could we object to ANY of these guys if Reuschel gets into the HOF?
      Agreed, you would have to be a supporter of an extremely large Hall to even consider Reuschel. I'd put the 16 guys you listed easily above Reuschel. There are probably 25-50 more that are in Reuschel's category. If Reuschel ever got in, you'd have 50 or so more guys that could say "if Reuschel, why not so and so"

      Comment


      • #4
        Hey, Cowtipper does come through when it comes to nominating novel candidates!
        THE REVOLUTION WILL NOT COME WITH A SCORECARD

        In the avy: AZ - Doe or Die

        Comment


        • #5
          What I've been doing is going down the "top 10 most similar" lists of each of the Hall of Famers, and the guys that are similar that are not in the Hall of Fame I've given a thread to. One would think that because they are similar to a Hall of Famer, they might have a case. Apparently this is not always so.

          When a bunch of a Hall of Famers most similar players are not really worth starting a thread for (see Roger Bresnahan, Dave Bancroft, etc) I start a poll asking about all of them at once. I think I'll do that with the Hall of Famer I'm currently working on, actually.

          Comment


          • #6
            If Reuschel had won one more game in 1988, he'd be generating more discussion.

            If Reuschel didn't pitch a lick better, but had enough luck to turn 16 losses into wins, he'd be 230-175 for his career. If he did this AND added another 20 game season, he'd be a candidate in the manner of Jim Bunning and Luis Tiant. One's in and one's out, but Reuschel would then be in the mix.
            "I do not care if half the league strikes. Those who do it will encounter quick retribution. All will be suspended and I don't care if it wrecks the National League for five years. This is the United States of America and one citizen has as much right to play as another. The National League will go down the line with Robinson whatever the consequences. You will find if you go through with your intention that you have been guilty of complete madness."

            NL President Ford Frick, 1947

            Comment


            • #7
              As a Giants' fan I saw Reuschel up close in 1989-90. He was fun to watch with that slow deliberate delivery and his nasty sinker. And he could swing the bat a little, too. But in the end he's not a HoF, though.
              Last edited by Honus Wagner Rules; 02-04-2008, 11:17 AM.
              Strikeouts are boring! Besides that, they're fascist. Throw some ground balls - it's more democratic.-Crash Davis

              Comment


              • #8
                Reuschel was a good pitcher for a long time, but despite what the "similarity scores" may say, he was never in the same category of pitchers as Hunter or Bunning.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Cowtipper View Post
                  What I've been doing is going down the "top 10 most similar" lists of each of the Hall of Famers, and the guys that are similar that are not in the Hall of Fame I've given a thread to. One would think that because they are similar to a Hall of Famer, they might have a case. Apparently this is not always so.

                  When a bunch of a Hall of Famers most similar players are not really worth starting a thread for (see Roger Bresnahan, Dave Bancroft, etc) I start a poll asking about all of them at once. I think I'll do that with the Hall of Famer I'm currently working on, actually.
                  Hey, keep it going.

                  Several of the guys you have suggest are not, in my estimation, viable Hall Candidates, but it's better than having another Jim Rice discussion!!
                  THE REVOLUTION WILL NOT COME WITH A SCORECARD

                  In the avy: AZ - Doe or Die

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by digglahhh View Post
                    Hey, keep it going.

                    Several of the guys you have suggest are not, in my estimation, viable Hall Candidates, but it's better than having another Jim Rice discussion!!
                    I fully agree. There's no harm in discussion of different players who had good or better careers. It's not like cowtipper is actually endorsing any of the players he's introducing, but merely presenting whatever case can be made.

                    It beats the endless Rice/Santo/Blyleven/Joe Jackson/Jimmy Wynn threads we've had or had other threads morph into.
                    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


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Brooklyn View Post
                      Agreed, you would have to be a supporter of an extremely large Hall to even consider Reuschel. I'd put the 16 guys you listed easily above Reuschel. There are probably 25-50 more that are in Reuschel's category. If Reuschel ever got in, you'd have 50 or so more guys that could say "if Reuschel, why not so and so"
                      and fuzzy bear:
                      > How could we object to ANY of these guys if Reuschel gets into the HOF?

                      (I count 17.)

                      Do you want to object to all?

                      Determined naysayers would find a way even if Reuschel were in the Hall.

                      Shocker, Shawkey, Mays, and Bridges?
                      Use a timeline argument. Good pitchers weren't very good then.

                      Contemporaries?
                      Reuschel was better than many of those pitchers and a lot better than some. Dave McNally for one, you can see in a glance at the record, but Mike Cuellar is another.
                      McNally and Cuellar were stalwarts for my favorite team. Only because Jim Palmer is one of the all-time greats while they are not even in the Hall of Fame conversations, it is fashionable to observe that Jim Palmer was one of the luckiest pitchers ever, lucky inl his teammates. It's true that he was fortunate there. He even went to the minors with arm trouble in '67-68 when the Orioles suffered other problems that would have damaged his W-L. But the record shows that McNally and Cuellar were a lot luckier in the W-L department. Relative to his 20-game compadres, for Palmer those teammates didn't get very many of those key hits at key times that make a gaudy W-L. Dave McNally was merely a very good pitcher when he put up 65-21 in three seasons. He played for one of baseball's greatest teams and it came through for him many, many, many times.

                      There is an argument that Dave McNally is the best Hall of Fame candidate on that list despite being the worst pitcher. The argument must be that lending his name to the Messersmith case outweighs the advantages in favor of all the others on the field.

                      [Edit: add paragraph
                      McNally was a great pitcher in 1968. Check out that daily record.
                      Dave McNally 1968 at Retrosheet
                      But great only in 1968. He cashed in all his credits next year. The 15-0 W-L thru July (and 17-game winning streak beginning '68) really made his reputation as one of baseball's best. He got to 15-0 with eleven! no-decisions including eight! games where he did not complete five innings.
                      Dave McNally 1969 at Retrosheet
                      ]
                      Last edited by Paul Wendt; 02-04-2008, 04:57 PM. Reason: add one paragraph plus revisions in italics

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Fuzzy Bear View Post
                        If Reuschel, why not . . .

                        Orel Hershiser
                        Luis Tiant
                        Jack Morris
                        Dennis Martinez
                        Frank Tanana
                        Billy Pierce
                        Dave McNally
                        Mike Cuellar
                        Mickey Lolich
                        Vida Blue
                        Urban Shocker
                        Bob Shawkey
                        Carl Mays
                        Tommy John
                        Jim Kaat
                        Bert Blyleven
                        Tommy Bridges

                        How could we object to ANY of these guys if Reuschel gets into the HOF?
                        Most of these guy are merkedly better than Ruschel. I see only Tanana as worse.
                        You've touched on the obvious ones. But there's still the Milt Pappass, Jerry Koosmans, and Steve Rogerss of the game who would rank right along side Reuschel.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Reuschel is better than you think. Check out this analysis:

                          Reuschel discussion at the Hall of Merit
                          Si quaeris peninsulam amoenam, circumspice.

                          Comprehensive Reform for the Veterans Committee -- Fixing the Hall continued.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Reuschel had a fine career but I can't get excited about his candidacy. Certainly there are worse pitchers in the HoF. Who can forget the bomb Bo Jackson hit off him in the ASG?
                            Buck O'Neil: The Monarch of Baseball

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by KCGHOST View Post
                              Certainly there are worse pitchers in the HoF.
                              I'd only count Jessie Haines as a worse selection.

                              Rube Marquard, Herb Pennock, and Jack Chesbro all have better cases than Reuschel.

                              Comment

                              Ad Widget

                              Collapse
                              Working...
                              X