Tim Hudson

[Jar of Flies]

Found the link to this thread from Toledo's hard work here (thanks again!): https://www.baseball-fever.com/forum...player-threads

Been a couple of years since this thread has had discussion, what's the current electorate's feelings on Hudson's candidacy?

For me, he's in the positive side of the gray area.
Bothrops site has him at #66 all-time.
Tom Thress shows even better than Bothrops assessment: http://baseball.tomthress.com/Leaders/UberLeaders.php
His WPA score is at a HOF level.
Jalbright has him a little shy with reference to pWAR, but Baseball-Reference is the low man, showing him a bit short, while Baseball Gauge has him just in.

Only 8 of 32 voters have Hudson clearing the bar in the single ballot hall of fame : https://www.baseball-fever.com/forum...f-hall-of-fame

[Chadwick]

The ballot will still be crowded when Hudson debuts in 2021 and I can't see him receiving more support than Johan Santana did. I still say he's one-and-done. That said, he's almost certainly one of the top 100 starting pitchers in major league history.

[bluesky5]

Hudson was a legitimate ace for a decade. He deserved to be in at least 3 more all-star games. He lost the 2000 CYA to Pedro with the wild 291 ERA+. He was overshadowed by Zito with the '3 Aces' even though he came up and tore up the A.L. before Zito played a full season. He got a standing ovation towards the end of his run in Atlanta. May have been his last home game I saw. But regardless the fans in Atlanta put respect on him before he left. I was glad to see that.

When Hudson debuts on the ballot - in 2021 - the BBWAA will have some combination of Curt Schilling, Roger Clemens, Mike Mussina, Roy Halladay, Johan Santana, Andy Pettitte or Roy Oswalt among the holdovers (not to mention the possibility of Trevor Hoffman or Billy Wagner). In other words, Hudson has no chance - rightly or wrongly - to be retained beyond his first ballot.

The ballot will still be crowded when Hudson debuts in 2021 and I can't see him receiving more support than Johan Santana did. I still say he's one-and-done. That said, he's almost certainly one of the top 100 starting pitchers in major league history.

I think Hudson has a significantly better chance than Oswalt & Santana (both under 175 wins) due to longevity and Pettitte because he was better by the numbers (slightly) and popular perception. The steroid issue will cost Pettitte in comparison too. The '3 aces' were a big deal when they together. They got a lot of notoriety. Almost definitely the best collection of starters under age 25 ever assembled.

Santana only has 139 career wins and only played 7 full seasons as a starter. He was better at his best than Hudson and has the chrome and leather to show for it but I don't see him getting more support than Hudson.

[Los Bravos]

I think Hudson has a significantly better chance than Oswalt & Santana (both under 175 wins) due to longevity and Pettitte because he was better by the numbers (slightly) and popular perception.

I'm not sure that last part about perception is true. Pettitte has a lot of people who think he was actually as good as his W-L numbers suggest he was and his October win total also impresses some weak minds more than it should.

My thoughts on Tim are all over this thread and I hate the very sight of Pettitte (to forestall this: because he's grossly overrated, a cheater, a hypocrite and a perjurer), so take my opinion about the relative merit of the two men with that as the background if you wish.

I'd like to see Tim stay on the ballot for a while but it's not likely to happen, for a number of reasons. Braves fatigue has already set in with this electorate or else Andruw Jones would be in far better position than he currently is and McGriff would've already been elected. Tim was elected to the Braves Team Hall of Fame this year. That's about as far as he's going to get. I hope I'm wrong but I doubt that I will be.

[Jar of Flies]

Bluesky, you don't have a single ballot hall of fame submitted, can you share yours and would Hudson be in?

Los Bravos, your single ballot omitted Hudson, would you put him in voting today?

And a thank you to everyone for adding to the discussion.

[Los Bravos]

I'm thinking about it.

[Jar of Flies]

I'm thinking about it.

Cool, would be great to get your perspective, it's an enjoyable endeavor I hope I can refresh this summer.

[bluesky5]

I just can't believe Tim Hudson isn't going to be in the HoF.

Bluesky, you don't have a single ballot hall of fame submitted, can you share yours and would Hudson be in?

Los Bravos, your single ballot omitted Hudson, would you put him in voting today?

And a thank you to everyone for adding to the discussion.

I definitely submitted one at one point. I'll try to dig it up out of the thread.

Edit: I found it. Hudson is in my futures list. I found it on page 62 and haven't updated it in probably 3 years.

[Freakshow]

As often happens, the conflating of two questions (‘will he” and “should he”) creates unnecessary friction.

For the first question: WILL Tim Hudson make the hall of fame? No, the BBWAA will not elect him. There are many ways to demonstrate this likelihood. Here is one that most people do not have easy access to, from The Bill James Handbook 2018.

In a lengthy article, Bill reviews dozens of players’ HOF chances using his refurbished Hall of Fame Monitor. Here is the complete list of retired pitchers from the expansion era with similar HOF Monitor scores to Hudson:

71 Mark Langston
71 Derek Lowe
70 Ken Holtzman
70 Jerry Reuss
69 Charlie Hough
68 Tim Hudson
68 Dean Chance
68 Rick Reuschel
68 Bret Saberhagen
67 Mel Stottlemyre
67 Jamie Moyer
66 Joe Niekro
65 Dave Stieb

Every pitcher on that list was one and done at the hands of the BBWAA. Hudson simply did not do enough of the things that hall of famers do. He has neither a dominant peak, nor a compiler’s bulk, nor postseason success.

For the second question: SHOULD Tim Hudson make the hall of fame? Well, he exceeds the Morris Precedent, but that’s a pretty low bar.

Here’s one very popular stat that doesn’t support Hudson. None of the guys near him in JAWS are hall of famers:

49.6 Ted Breitenstein #75
49.1 George Uhle #76
48.9 Kevin Appier #77
48.9 Chuck Finley #78
48.4 Tommy John #79
48.3 Tim Hudson #80
48.3 Johan Santana #81
48.2 Orel Hershiser #82
48.1 Wilbur Wood #83
48.1 Bucky Walters #84
48.0 Frank Tanana #85
47.8 Wilbur Cooper #86
47.6 Mark Buehrle #87

However, as Jar points out, bWAR is the least favorable system to Hudson. Basically, I see him as straddling the HOF in/out line. You can argue for Hudson if you want and I won’t oppose it, but he’s not near the head of the line. I see at least a dozen eligible starting pitchers I’d put in before him.

[Toledo Inquisition]

I took another look at his case, and what I found surprised me. Looking at his career totals, I could make a good case for him...but when looking at individual seasons, I wasn't so confident because he had so many 100-190 inning seasons (8 total). So in effect, he was a compiler of many 75% seasons, but at a quality level. Missing 5-10 starts a year started to add up when looking at seasonal breakdowns, but not for career totals.

For his best full seasons, those weren't numerous enough or high enough to swing him into my HOF either.

Interesting career...in effect he is a poster boy for compilers who compiled at a higher level.


Lastly, he pitched nine years in Atlanta, and only six in Oakland. I'm shocked...I always remember him as an A, not a Brave.

[Jar of Flies]

As often happens, the conflating of two questions (‘will he” and “should he”) creates unnecessary friction.

For the first question: WILL Tim Hudson make the hall of fame? No, the BBWAA will not elect him. There are many ways to demonstrate this likelihood. Here is one that most people do not have easy access to, from The Bill James Handbook 2018.

In a lengthy article, Bill reviews dozens of players’ HOF chances using his refurbished Hall of Fame Monitor. Here is the complete list of retired pitchers from the expansion era with similar HOF Monitor scores to Hudson:

71 Mark Langston
71 Derek Lowe
70 Ken Holtzman
70 Jerry Reuss
69 Charlie Hough
68 Tim Hudson
68 Dean Chance
68 Rick Reuschel
68 Bret Saberhagen
67 Mel Stottlemyre
67 Jamie Moyer
66 Joe Niekro
65 Dave Stieb

Every pitcher on that list was one and done at the hands of the BBWAA. Hudson simply did not do enough of the things that hall of famers do. He has neither a dominant peak, nor a compiler’s bulk, nor postseason success.

For the second question: SHOULD Tim Hudson make the hall of fame? Well, he exceeds the Morris Precedent, but that’s a pretty low bar.

Here’s one very popular stat that doesn’t support Hudson. None of the guys near him in JAWS are hall of famers:

49.6 Ted Breitenstein #75
49.1 George Uhle #76
48.9 Kevin Appier #77
48.9 Chuck Finley #78
48.4 Tommy John #79
48.3 Tim Hudson #80
48.3 Johan Santana #81
48.2 Orel Hershiser #82
48.1 Wilbur Wood #83
48.1 Bucky Walters #84
48.0 Frank Tanana #85
47.8 Wilbur Cooper #86
47.6 Mark Buehrle #87

However, as Jar points out, bWAR is the least favorable system to Hudson. Basically, I see him as straddling the HOF in/out line. You can argue for Hudson if you want and I won’t oppose it, but he’s not near the head of the line. I see at least a dozen eligible starting pitchers I’d put in before him.

Fine post Freak, let's get egregious oversights into the Hall of Fame, then focus on splitting hairs of gray area candidates.

From Tom Thress, post WWII, guys +/- 35 points, post-season excluded
228.3 Fergie Jenkins
227.9 Whitey Ford
226.4 Curt Schilling
223.3 Gaylord Perry
222.9 Roy Halladay
217.1 Nolan Ryan
206.3 Don Sutton
202.1 Bret Saberhagen
199.2 Tommy John
193.2 Tim Hudson
184.7 CC Sabathia
182.8 Bob Lemon
179.0 Dwight Gooden
175.7 Jim Bunning
175.5 Andy Pettitte
174.4 Billy Pierce
174.2 Dennis Eckersley
174.0 Zack Greinke
173.9 Sandy Koufax
170.3 Johan Santana
169.7 David Cone
162.6 Luis Tiant
160.9 Phil Niekro
160.7 Orel Hershiser

[bluesky5]

Freakshow makes a good point delineating between 'will/should' he make it. I'm not arguing with what the data says. But there are different ways that players accumulate this value. Just looking at the list(s). Derek Lowe wasn't better than Tim Hudson. Jerry Reuss, Ken Holtzman, Charlie Hough, Dean Chance, Rick Reuschel? C'mon, no way. Langston, Saberhagen & Hudson are a notch above the rest of these guys.

71 Mark Langston
71 Derek Lowe
70 Ken Holtzman
70 Jerry Reuss
69 Charlie Hough
68 Tim Hudson
68 Dean Chance
68 Rick Reuschel
68 Bret Saberhagen

Now this list is more interesting...

49.6 Ted Breitenstein #75
49.1 George Uhle #76
48.9 Kevin Appier #77
48.9 Chuck Finley #78
48.4 Tommy John #79
48.3 Tim Hudson #80
48.3 Johan Santana #81
48.2 Orel Hershiser #82
48.1 Wilbur Wood #83
48.1 Bucky Walters #84
48.0 Frank Tanana #85
47.8 Wilbur Cooper #86
47.6 Mark Buehrle #87

I'm tired of mediocre Ted Breitenstein popping up places he doesn't belong. He's the only guy that can out-mediocre Rick Reuschel. It's the same as the other list. There's a bunch of all peak guys and a bunch of mediocre guys (whether by ability or injury) that hung around and could be excellent at times. In no particular order I'd group him in with these guys...

48.9 Kevin Appier #77
48.9 Chuck Finley #78
48.4 Tommy John #79
48.3 Tim Hudson #80
48.3 Johan Santana #81
48.2 Orel Hershiser #82
71 Mark Langston
68 Bret Saberhagen

[Los Bravos]

He's the only guy that can out-mediocre Rick Reuschel.

Too funny.

48.9 Kevin Appier #77
48.9 Chuck Finley #78
48.4 Tommy John #79
48.3 Tim Hudson #80
48.3 Johan Santana #81
48.2 Orel Hershiser #82
71 Mark Langston
68 Bret Saberhagen

Yeah, those guys are all on about the same level.

[bluesky5]

Too funny.



Yeah, those guys are all on about the same level.

Leaving out Bucky Walters & Buehrle was definitely a mistake because they were both legit aces that anchored world series winning staffs. I like Wilbur Wood's peak a lot too.

[Los Bravos]

I think a bit more of Holtzman than you seem to but that's not worth making a fuss over.