Relievers in the Hall of Fame

[Chadwick]

I'm opening this thread as a consequence of thinking about Goose Gossage and Bruce Sutter. I've inputted the win shares for every relief pitcher from 1972-2003 into my computer and am using the data to analyze reliever performance relative to other relief pitchers. The results are very interesting.

For example:

Bruce Sutter
12 years, 168 win shares
14 win shares/yr. avg.
Led league: 3 times
Top ten: 8 times
Best 5 consecutive: 94 (1977-81)

Goose Gossage
22 years, 223 win shares
10 win shares/yr. avg.
Lead league: 2 times
Top ten: 9 times
Best 5 consecutive: 90 (1975-79)

Lee Smith
18 years, 198 win shares
11 win shares/yr. avg.
Led league: 1 time
Top ten: 10 times
Best 5 consecutive: 83 (1983-87)

[julusnc]

How does Jeff Reardon's career stack up against those three Chancellor?

[julusnc]

Also if it is not to much trouble who seem like the ten best canidates not in the Hall of Fame?

[abacab]

Interesting info, but I don't think Win Shares is nearly as effective for relievers (or pitchers in general) as it is for position players. Still, it's as good as any stat we've got. Anyone who is able to invent a statistic that effectively measures the value of relievers should get the Nobel Prize for Baseball.

[RuthMayBond]

Quisenberry, Franco anyone?

[dgarza]

I'd interested to see how this list would stack up against current HOF relievers

[RuthMayBond]

I'd interested to see how this list would stack up against current HOF relievers

There's not a lot even if you count Eck

[nightal]

I'm opening this thread as a consequence of thinking about Goose Gossage and Bruce Sutter. I've inputted the win shares for every relief pitcher from 1972-2003 into my computer and am using the data to analyze reliever performance relative to other relief pitchers. The results are very interesting.

For example:

Bruce Sutter
12 years, 168 win shares
14 win shares/yr. avg.
Led league: 3 times
Top ten: 8 times
Best 5 consecutive: 94 (1977-81)

Goose Gossage
22 years, 223 win shares
10 win shares/yr. avg.
Lead league: 2 times
Top ten: 9 times
Best 5 consecutive: 90 (1975-79)

Lee Smith
18 years, 198 win shares
11 win shares/yr. avg.
Led league: 1 time
Top ten: 10 times
Best 5 consecutive: 83 (1983-87)

Good Work, a great compliment to the "study" I did a while back ranking top relievers using all major pitching categories.

Top Relief Pitchers

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

With the Hall of Fame voting going on and several top relievers being mentioned, I used the "formula" I had previously used during the Marichal/Palmer/Ford/Ryan runoff, with a few changes.

28 relievers have at least 200 saves in history, with less than 52 starts (I used 52 instead of 50 to get Wilhelm in) I used those 2 items as career filters. I'm figuring career value, not big seasons.
If writers don't start electing the Gossage's, Sutter's and Lee Smith's, there is going to be a tremendous backlog of top relievers coming up behind them.

My "findings"- using a 28pts for 1st down to 1pt. for 28th. etc......


PTS.
277-Hoyt Wilhelm
236-Trevor Hoffman
233-Tom Henke
230-Rollie Fingers
223-Mariano Rivera
217-Goose Gossage
214-Lee Smith
214-John Wetteland
211-John Franco
207-Bruce Sutter
199-Robb Nen
194-Dan Quisenberry
192-Jeff Reardon
184-Doug Jones
179-Billy Wagner
174-Sparky Lyle
163-Rod Beck
162-Roberto Hernandez
159-Jeff Montgomery
157-Troy Percival
147-Randy Myers
141-Todd Worrell
138-Gene Garber
134-Dave Smith
120-Ugueth Urbina
86-Gregg Olson
81-Jeff Shaw
35- Bobby Thigpen

NOTE--- Dennis Eckersley(361), Jose Mesa(95), Dave Righetti(89) and Rick Aguilera(89) had to be left out due to the the amount of games they started. (More than 52).

If they were in than Eck would be at the top of this list and the others roughly near the bottom.
AL
__________________

[shlevine42]

I posted this recently on the LEE SMITH thread in this Forum.

It seems appropriate here and I'd like your opinion.

"A recent article in The NY TIMES shed some new light on baseball’s top relievers and noted that raw saves don’t provide a true measure of a reliever’s HOF worthiness, because save chances have become easier to convert in the past 15 years.

The analysis notes that “not all saves are created equal,” and that the relief appearances of Sutter and Gossage lasted longer and were more trying than those of the Eckersley-like closers of today, who seldom go more than an inning.

Eckersley’s saves lasted an average of 3.33 outs; in contrast, Gossage (4.73), Sutter (4.72) and Fingers (4.82) lasted more than 40% longer. Moreover, 63% of Eckersley’s save chances came with none out in the 9th, compared with only 31-35% for the other three pitchers.

In addition, those earlier relievers faced more threatening situations; Eckersley entered many games with no one on base and faced an average of only .49 inherited runners per game, vs. .67 for Sutter, .86 for Gossage and Fingers, and 1.08 for Sparky Lyle.

These numbers put a new face on the comparison of the top relievers, and show that Lyle and Gossage are in the same category as Fingers (the only modern closer currently in the Hall). And considerably more impressive than Eckersley, who’s in the Hall partly because he won 149 games as a starter before switching to relief.

                     ERA   SAVES     OUTS/     I.R.G.                                 
                                       SAVE
Lyle                 2.88     238      4.66       1.08
Fingers             2.73     341      4.82       .86
Gossage             2.77    310       4.72        .86
Sutter              2.83    300       4.73         .67    
Quisenberry         2.76    244       5.19        .77
Smith               3.03     478      3.72        .50
Eckersley            2.90   387       3.33        .49  

I.R.G. = Inherited Runners per Game

As for Smith...his huge total of 478 saves can be seen as more of the modern variety, and less impressive than Lyle, Fingers and Gossage.

And it makes a strong case for considering Quisenberry for the Hall.

Here's a link to the article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/02/s...html?oref=login"

What do you think? Is this a valid means of evaluating/comparing relievers?

[nightal]

Yes, as all studies and/or opinions; this is very interesting. I'm not sure what to make of it, but yes, Quiz matches up very well here. BTW, what an underrated guy. Great reliever and very good man.
I'd also like to hear from more about Tom Henke, he sometimes gets overlooked when talking about relievers.

[RuthMayBond]

I posted this recently on the LEE SMITH thread in this Forum.

It seems appropriate here and I'd like your opinion.

"A recent article in The NY TIMES shed some new light on baseball’s top relievers and noted that raw saves don’t provide a true measure of a reliever’s HOF worthiness, because save chances have become easier to convert in the past 15 years.

The analysis notes that “not all saves are created equal,” and that the relief appearances of Sutter and Gossage lasted longer and were more trying than those of the Eckersley-like closers of today, who seldom go more than an inning.

Eckersley’s saves lasted an average of 3.33 outs; in contrast, Gossage (4.73), Sutter (4.72) and Fingers (4.82) lasted more than 40% longer. Moreover, 63% of Eckersley’s save chances came with none out in the 9th, compared with only 31-35% for the other three pitchers.

In addition, those earlier relievers faced more threatening situations; Eckersley entered many games with no one on base and faced an average of only .49 inherited runners per game, vs. .67 for Sutter, .86 for Gossage and Fingers, and 1.08 for Sparky Lyle.

These numbers put a new face on the comparison of the top relievers, and show that Lyle and Gossage are in the same category as Fingers (the only modern closer currently in the Hall). And considerably more impressive than Eckersley, who’s in the Hall partly because he won 149 games as a starter before switching to relief.

                     ERA   SAVES     OUTS/     I.R.G.                                 
                                       SAVE
Lyle                 2.88     238      4.66       1.08
Fingers             2.73     341      4.82       .86
Gossage             2.77    310       4.72        .86
Sutter              2.83    300       4.73         .67    
Quisenberry         2.76    244       5.19        .77
Smith               3.03     478      3.72        .50
Eckersley            2.90   387       3.33        .49  

I.R.G. = Inherited Runners per Game

As for Smith...his huge total of 478 saves can be seen as more of the modern variety, and less impressive than Lyle, Fingers and Gossage.

And it makes a strong case for considering Quisenberry for the Hall.

Here's a link to the article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/02/s...html?oref=login"

What do you think? Is this a valid means of evaluating/comparing relievers?

Except that for all of Smith's short saves, he still had 24% more innings than Sutter. And a much better ERA+ than Fingers. And was in the top 10 more times than Gossage, and was a Save king and in the top 10 more than Gossage.

[leecemark]

--I think the difference is that it is MUCH easier to come in to start the 9th with the bases empty than it is to come in with men on in the 7th or 8th and fiinish out the game. An dead average major league pitcher can come in and throw one scoreless inning about 2/3 of the time. You don't need a great pitcher to fill that role, although there may be some psycological benefit to having one.

[Fuzzy Bear]

My gut places Elroy Face and Firpo Marberry at the top of the reliever's list.

[RuthMayBond]

My gut places Elroy Face and Firpo Marberry at the top of the reliever's list.

I'd like to get a calculation of Firpo's ERA+ as a reliever. You don't want to look at Face's

[flash143817]

--I think the difference is that it is MUCH easier to come in to start the 9th with the bases empty than it is to come in with men on in the 7th or 8th and fiinish out the game. An dead average major league pitcher can come in and throw one scoreless inning about 2/3 of the time. You don't need a great pitcher to fill that role, although there may be some psycological benefit to having one.

I tend to agree with this. My informal reason focuses on Eric Gagne for the Dodgers. Their success with a healthy Gagne was far superior to that they have seen over the last 2 years with more of a closer by committee system. I think there is definitely something in the confidence factor of having a "great" closer.