Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Tim Hudson

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

  • Originally posted by Los Bravos View Post
    Grant Brisbee does his usual stellar job of laying out the case.
    I thought Brisbee's article really strengthens the case for Hudson not reaching Cooperstown. Anytime you have to put down a list of different outcomes, that's a problem. Hudson was very good, but the career just doesn't measure up, and he was mediocre in the postseason.

    Comment


    • No reference to the nonexistent Hall Of The Very Good?

      That wasn't supposed to be an article advocating for his election. The fact that he was short was sort of the whole point.
      3 6 10 21 29 31 35 41 42 44 47

      Comment


      • Originally posted by bluesky5 View Post
        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.
        SABR-metrics, bro!

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Los Bravos View Post
          Grant Brisbee does his usual stellar job of laying out the case.
          Pretty interesting dissection, even 1-2 of those scenarios added on and Hudson achieves more sufficient acclaim for the traditionally minded voter. Funny he mentions 2001 as the closest Hudson came to a CYA. I always think back to 2003. 2002-2003 were especially the years where Hudson was the victim of blown saves and poor run support. He had a lot of no decisions those years. Give him 4 more wins (20 total) in 2003 and he very well possibly beats Roy Halladay in the voting with his marginally lower ERA (2.70 to 3.25, respectively). If any one of those Oakland teams figures out game 5 and advances on to World Series glory, that also really changes the way the mainstream consensus perceives Huddy.

          He’s over my line, and I’m definitely partial being an A’s fan and following his entire career as one of my favorites, but the more realistic side of me also thinks Tim Hudson will have a better chance than many are predicting for him. He was an AL pitcher coming up in ’99 — the height of PEDs, insanely inflated offenses, and the end of the CG in favor of the QS. When he gets on the ballot, he’s going to be very competitive against his peers. He outlasted Oswalt, Santana, even Halladay, had a slightly better overall career than Sabathia, less hittable than Buehrle, more durable than Carpenter, and far better quality than Colon, Zito, Peavy, or Burnett. Compare him to pitchers slightly before his generation and he also has some interesting facts: more wins than Smoltz, Schilling, more wins and innings than Martinez, nailing down 200 wins in 88 less innings than it took for Greg Maddux to cross the same threshold. I think, when put in context, and with the previous generation all yea or nayed, Hudson and his aforementioned contemporaries will be the force that causes the sea change people have been looking for in the voters, including forcing voters to start turning to more sabermetrics to better understand these mysterious modern pitchers with noticeably lower Ws/IP/Ks. Hudson’s best bubblegum stat is his gaudy W-L record, his best nerd stat is probably his 120 ERA+ spanning over 3,000 innings. Might require a Blyleven-esque campaign, but combine these numbers and circumstances with being highly regarded by teammates and fans and there’s going to be a case for Hudson. The Hall of Fame certainly wouldn’t be worsened by his presence.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by blacknwhiterose View Post
            Pretty interesting dissection, even 1-2 of those scenarios added on and Hudson achieves more sufficient acclaim for the traditionally minded voter. Funny he mentions 2001 as the closest Hudson came to a CYA. I always think back to 2003. 2002-2003 were especially the years where Hudson was the victim of blown saves and poor run support. He had a lot of no decisions those years. Give him 4 more wins (20 total) in 2003 and he very well possibly beats Roy Halladay in the voting with his marginally lower ERA (2.70 to 3.25, respectively). If any one of those Oakland teams figures out game 5 and advances on to World Series glory, that also really changes the way the mainstream consensus perceives Huddy.

            He’s over my line, and I’m definitely partial being an A’s fan and following his entire career as one of my favorites, but the more realistic side of me also thinks Tim Hudson will have a better chance than many are predicting for him. He was an AL pitcher coming up in ’99 — the height of PEDs, insanely inflated offenses, and the end of the CG in favor of the QS. When he gets on the ballot, he’s going to be very competitive against his peers. He outlasted Oswalt, Santana, even Halladay, had a slightly better overall career than Sabathia, less hittable than Buehrle, more durable than Carpenter, and far better quality than Colon, Zito, Peavy, or Burnett. Compare him to pitchers slightly before his generation and he also has some interesting facts: more wins than Smoltz, Schilling, more wins and innings than Martinez, nailing down 200 wins in 88 less innings than it took for Greg Maddux to cross the same threshold. I think, when put in context, and with the previous generation all yea or nayed, Hudson and his aforementioned contemporaries will be the force that causes the sea change people have been looking for in the voters, including forcing voters to start turning to more sabermetrics to better understand these mysterious modern pitchers with noticeably lower Ws/IP/Ks. Hudson’s best bubblegum stat is his gaudy W-L record, his best nerd stat is probably his 120 ERA+ spanning over 3,000 innings. Might require a Blyleven-esque campaign, but combine these numbers and circumstances with being highly regarded by teammates and fans and there’s going to be a case for Hudson. The Hall of Fame certainly wouldn’t be worsened by his presence.
            That is pretty much it. We need time to allow expectations to change to accommodate the way starting pitchers have been managed over the past 20 + years. For now the days of 30+ decisions and 250 IP every year are a thing of the past. He cannot be judged by the standards of the 60s-80s pitchers, but instead by that of the 2000 and beyond.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by blacknwhiterose View Post
              Might require a Blyleven-esque campaign, but combine these numbers and circumstances with being highly regarded by teammates and fans and there’s going to be a case for Hudson. The Hall of Fame certainly wouldn’t be worsened by his presence.
              That may or may not be the case, but the facts are that nobody is getting 15 tries on the ballot any longer. Hudson will pitch his final game this month; he's already been relegated to bullpen duty. Retiring at the end of the 2015 season means he'll become eligible for his first BBWAA ballot in 2021, six years from now. Roger Clemens will still be on the ballot. Mike Mussina will probably still be on the ballot. Curt Schilling may still be on the ballot for goodness' sake. Add that you have Roy Halladay, Johan Santana and maybe Roy Oswalt or Cliff Lee on the ballot by then.

              Also, Hudson could be debuting with Bartolo Colon (who, unlike Hudson, won a Cy Young Award) and maybe even Mark Buehrle. And these are just the starting pitchers.

              Others competing for votes will be the possibility of Trevor Hoffman, Billy Wagner and even Joe Nathan on the ballot during Hudson's candidacy, to say nothing of the two dozen position players who could conceivably be competing for the voters' attention at that time.

              Whatever his merits, it's difficult to see Hudson getting more than 5% in his first try, much less climbing the hill to eventual election by the BBWAA.
              "It is a simple matter to erect a Hall of Fame, but difficult to select the tenants." -- Ken Smith
              "I am led to suspect that some of the electorate is very dumb." -- Henry P. Edwards
              "You have a Hall of Fame to put people in, not keep people out." -- Brian Kenny
              "There's no such thing as a perfect ballot." -- Jay Jaffe

              Comment


              • This is an electorate which were one-and-done with David Cone and Bret Saberhagen and Dwight Gooden. It's an electorate where Curt Schilling hasn't yet received two out of every five votes. I wouldn't hold my breath.
                "It is a simple matter to erect a Hall of Fame, but difficult to select the tenants." -- Ken Smith
                "I am led to suspect that some of the electorate is very dumb." -- Henry P. Edwards
                "You have a Hall of Fame to put people in, not keep people out." -- Brian Kenny
                "There's no such thing as a perfect ballot." -- Jay Jaffe

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Brad Harris View Post
                  That may or may not be the case, but the facts are that nobody is getting 15 tries on the ballot any longer. Hudson will pitch his final game this month; he's already been relegated to bullpen duty. Retiring at the end of the 2015 season means he'll become eligible for his first BBWAA ballot in 2021, six years from now. Roger Clemens will still be on the ballot. Mike Mussina will probably still be on the ballot. Curt Schilling may still be on the ballot for goodness' sake. Add that you have Roy Halladay, Johan Santana and maybe Roy Oswalt or Cliff Lee on the ballot by then.

                  Also, Hudson could be debuting with Bartolo Colon (who, unlike Hudson, won a Cy Young Award) and maybe even Mark Buehrle. And these are just the starting pitchers.

                  Others competing for votes will be the possibility of Trevor Hoffman, Billy Wagner and even Joe Nathan on the ballot during Hudson's candidacy, to say nothing of the two dozen position players who could conceivably be competing for the voters' attention at that time.

                  Whatever his merits, it's difficult to see Hudson getting more than 5% in his first try, much less climbing the hill to eventual election by the BBWAA.
                  Yankee-killer Schilling and 270-153 Mussina will rise quickly on the ballot now that the Maddux-Glavine-Smoltz-Johnson-Martinez wave has passed and the Blyleven and Morris debates have been decided. I predict both will be in, or almost in, in 5 years. The Roger Clemens Saga may still be going on, but that is becoming mostly a separate issue unto itself. Relief pitchers are emerging as candidates, but will also have to be judged separately what with their totally different roles/stats and shouldn't overshadow the starters.

                  That will leave a pretty open ballot for the Late Gen-X/Early Gen-Y pitchers. Most agree that Halladay was the gold standard for a decade. He would've been a first ballot HoFer had he not flamed out at 35. I think Sabathia will have a legit case, if he can pitch effectively and get to the 3,000k club, but that's a big if considering he's been the definition of washed-up for 3 years and the Yankees can't wait to get him off their payroll after next season. Mark Buehrle could be a dark horse candidate if he can keep rolling and get to some amazing (by today's standards) counting numbers. Johan Santana is Johan Santana. Perhaps after we all absorb the sea change, we could possibly see Santana as a modern Koufax, currently I still think he's closer to Ron Guidry. The fact is, all of these guys have their flaws, only Halladay has a stronger all-around resume than Hudson, but Hudson even has more wins, innings and a world series ring that Doc never got. After that, the competition gets even weaker. Lee and Oswalt are not even close. Colon is becoming like Jaime Moyer 2.0, but his second wind is nullified by his PED usage. Pettitte is also saddled with the PED usage.

                  Halladay should be the first to go, though it may take him at least a few ballots. After that, I think Hudson gets borderline support, Blyleven/Bunning/Tiant level support, 10-30% for the first few ballots, then see what happens from there as the change in POVs by writers is further absorbed. I think Hudson's timing will be his friend.

                  A lot may also depend on how the younger Gen-Y pitchers pan out and eventually become eligible: Kershaw/Hernandez/Greinke/Hamels/Verlander/etc. Some of them already have a lot of highlights and hardware, but, for example, despite steamrolling lineups for 5 years now, Kershaw is finishing for the 3rd time in those five years with a mid-teens win total. Hernandez is probably more than half way through his career and still has only 141 wins.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Brad Harris View Post
                    This is an electorate which were one-and-done with David Cone and Bret Saberhagen and Dwight Gooden. It's an electorate where Curt Schilling hasn't yet received two out of every five votes. I wouldn't hold my breath.
                    Cone/Saberhagen/Gooden were all fascinating but seriously flawed candidates who did not reach even bench-mark, "nut-and-bolt" milestones. Then you have a guy like Hershiser, who was historic for a while, but then tragically went into his 10 year descent to mediocrity. Then there's people like Kevin Brown, who was simply disliked, and was a user to boot.

                    Roy Halladay, Tim Hudson, and maybe a few of the other post-2000 pitchers don't have as many holes in their resumes as these people. Halladay and Hudson have better comprehensive, consistently quality bodies of work than Saberhagen/Gooden/Hershiser/Brown. David Cone actually has a pretty quality body of work over 12 years ('88-'99), but he somehow still ended up with noticeably unimpressive counting stats for a 90s pitcher, his jumping from team to team I think in a way hurts him, and he had one of the most spectacular flame outs to a major league career.
                    blacknwhiterose
                    Registered User
                    Last edited by blacknwhiterose; 09-10-2015, 05:07 PM.

                    Comment


                    • He finishes his career with these numbers: 222-133 W-L, 3.49 ERA, 120 ERA+, 2080 K, < 1000 BB, > 3000 innings, 57.2 WAR, 4 ASGs, three top-five Cy Young finishes, including a runner-up, plus a top-ten finish as well.

                      All time, he ranks 60th in winning percentage, 62nd in starts, 66th in strikeouts, 67th in pWAR and 73rd in wins. He also contributed his fair share defensively and offensively (he had positive oWAR), slugging four home runs, collecting 98 hits, scoring 35 runs and driving 42 runs in in his career.

                      Let's put him in some clubs:

                      220+ W, < 130 L: M. Brown, W. Ford, A. Spalding, T. Hudson

                      2,000+ K, < 1,000 BB, 3,000+ IP, >= 120 ERA+: 9 times, 5 in Hall (others: M. Mussina, C. Schilling, K. Brown & T. Hudson)

                      .625 W%, >= 3,000 IP: 17 times, those not in Hall: R. Clemens, M. Mussina, A. Pettitte, T. Hudson

                      He's more than a Hall of Famer in my book.

                      Comment


                      • Dubble poast

                        Comment


                        • Hudson's a ... bizarre case. It's like he was there but not there when he was in Atlanta. People essentially ignored him outside of the Bay Area and he was quietly Atlanta's ace during a period of time.
                          46 wins to match last year's total

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Cowtipper View Post
                            He finishes his career with these numbers: 222-133 W-L, 3.49 ERA, 120 ERA+, 2080 K, < 1000 BB, > 3000 innings, 57.2 WAR, 4 ASGs, three top-five Cy Young finishes, including a runner-up, plus a top-ten finish as well.

                            All time, he ranks 60th in winning percentage, 62nd in starts, 66th in strikeouts, 67th in pWAR and 73rd in wins. He also contributed his fair share defensively and offensively (he had positive oWAR), slugging four home runs, collecting 98 hits, scoring 35 runs and driving 42 runs in in his career.

                            Let's put him in some clubs:

                            220+ W, < 130 L: M. Brown, W. Ford, A. Spalding, T. Hudson

                            2,000+ K, < 1,000 BB, 3,000+ IP, >= 120 ERA+: 9 times, 5 in Hall (others: M. Mussina, C. Schilling, K. Brown & T. Hudson)

                            .625 W%, >= 3,000 IP: 17 times, those not in Hall: R. Clemens, M. Mussina, A. Pettitte, T. Hudson

                            He's more than a Hall of Famer in my book.
                            He has 133 losses. He shouldn't be in that first club.

                            Comment


                            • The search was for 135 or less, I just put 130 because I'm an idiot.

                              Comment


                              • 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.
                                "It is a simple matter to erect a Hall of Fame, but difficult to select the tenants." -- Ken Smith
                                "I am led to suspect that some of the electorate is very dumb." -- Henry P. Edwards
                                "You have a Hall of Fame to put people in, not keep people out." -- Brian Kenny
                                "There's no such thing as a perfect ballot." -- Jay Jaffe

                                Comment

                                Ad Widget

                                Collapse
                                Working...
                                X