Tim Hudson

[Bothrops Atrox]

WAR is actually a pretty good predictor of HOF membership for starting pitchers:

Of the 38 pitchers with WAR between 50 and 60, including Hudson at 56, 8 are in, 30 are out. If you look at Hudson's WAR peers you see a lot of near-misses or shoulda beens, depending on your point of view.

Of the 15 with WAR between 60 and 65, 10 are in and 5 are out.

So the split results here seem to agree with Hudson's WAR and the electors' track record. Two or three decent seasons in the twilight of his career might help his cause a lot.

Yeah -I think 60 is close to the 50/50 mark. My point was that WAA is better in looking at modern guys due to the whole replacement/usage pattern thing.

[philliesfiend55]

While Hudson reached the 2000 strikeout milestone in 2014, he went 9-13 to drop him back to 90 wins over .500 (214-124). If he had continued on with his string of over .500 seasons he would have reached 100 wins over .500 by 2014 or 2015 and that would have cemented his place in my personal Hall Of Fame. He'll put off retirement for at least one more season since he's under contract for 2015, when he will turn 40. If he finishes his career poorly, I'm not so certain he's a Hall Of Famer.

[Chadwick]

Curious how others evaluate Hudson vs. Andy Pettitte?

[Bothrops Atrox]

Curious how evaluate Hudson vs. Andy Pettitte?

Pettitte's best 2 seasons were probably better than anything Hudson did. But the bulk of his other seasons were all a step behind Hudson's seasons. I'd take Hudson's constant really-goodness over Pettitte's wider gap.

That is why I would put Hudson borderline-in and Pettitte borderline-out.

But they aren't too far apart.

[baltimorechop]

Pettitte's best 2 seasons were probably better than anything Hudson did. But the bulk of his other seasons were all a step behind Hudson's seasons. I'd take Hudson's constant really-goodness over Pettitte's wider gap.

That is why I would put Hudson borderline-in and Pettitte borderline-out.

But they aren't too far apart.

I like this assessment. I think I tossed Pettitte in mine, and will do the same with Hudson when he retires. I think i just have a tad lower line though.

[Sliding Billy]

Yeah -I think 60 is close to the 50/50 mark. My point was that WAA is better in looking at modern guys due to the whole replacement/usage pattern thing.

Oh, yes, I didn't mean to take issue with that. There's a whole source of value that has sort of dried up.

[Bothrops Atrox]

Oh, yes, I didn't mean to take issue with that. There's a whole source of value that has sort of dried up.

Well not dried up...distributed to relievers.

[Chadwick]

Well not dried up...distributed to relievers.

Ironic that as the innings eaten by great starters has dissipated, the innings of great relievers has not increased, merely the total innings of all relievers. I can't understand any logical justification for the fad of the modern bullpen usage pattern. Damn you, Tony LaRussa!

[Bothrops Atrox]

Ironic that as the innings eaten by great starters has dissipated, the innings of great relievers has not increased, merely the total innings of all relievers. I can't understand any logical justification for the fad of the modern bullpen usage pattern. Damn you, Tony LaRussa!

Specialization. 3 pitchers can mix and match for handedness and throw harder and not have to face an order twice, etc. And it works. Reliever's ERA relative to starters has continued to improve the more specialization has occurred. Relievers now have ERAs 25% better than starters.

[Los Bravos]

Curious how evaluate Hudson vs. Andy Pettitte?

Well, one is an on the record cheater.

[Chadwick]

Well, one is an on the record cheater.

Dammit, Jim...I'm a baseball fan, not a moralist. I'm talking about their records, man, their records.

[Los Bravos]

You can't accurately judge Pettitte's record without reference to that fact, Bones.

[Los Bravos]

Grant Brisbee does his usual stellar job of laying out the case.

[bluesky5]

Ironic that as the innings eaten by great starters has dissipated, the innings of great relievers has not increased, merely the total innings of all relievers. I can't understand any logical justification for the fad of the modern bullpen usage pattern. Damn you, Tony LaRussa!

It's bad for baseball. I'd like to see a limit on the number of pitchers that can be used per inning. Sometimes sports need to be saved from over-coaching that takes away from the game experience. Such as basketball implementing the shot clock. They should eliminate the hack-a-shaq strategy too but that's for a different time.

[Bothrops Atrox]

It's bad for baseball. I'd like to see a limit on the number of pitchers that can be used per inning. Sometimes sports need to be saved from over-coaching that takes away from the game experience. Such as basketball implementing the shot clock. They should eliminate the hack-a-shaq strategy too but that's for a different time.

Its one of those things like throwing the ball down field 40 yards at the end of the game knowing a Pass Interference will be called 50% of the time or Hack-A-Shaq, like you said. Effective and legal but boring and gimicky. I'd be fine with rules eliminating these two examples, but I am not sure there are any rules that can be put into play here. And make no mistake; hyper-specialization of bullpen is effective. And it is a little boring. But what can be done about it. Same thing with shifts. Legal and effective. What can be done other than grinnning and bearing it?

Heck, the NJ Devils won 3 titles and forever turned a fast-paced, graceful, slick, offensively beautiful game into soccer on ice by their blasted winger-as-defender traps. Not to mention Dean Smith's 4-corners. And none of these things lasted. If you are patient enough, who knows what we will see. But koodos for these guys for finding schticks that helped win. I'd probably do the same.

Now, it is very true that modern pitchers are not held to the same counting stat standards as the old guys. We are going to have a 20 year stretch of pitchers with only a very small handful making the HOF.