In continuing my theme of the best and worst players & pitchers in and out of the Hall of Fame, here's my list of the ten worst pitchers in the Hall of Fame, according to WAR (Wins Above Replacement). This list excludes those, such as Babe Ruth, Candy Cummings, or John Montgomery Ward, who pitched extensively, but are in the Hall of Fame for other reasons.
10. Bob Lemon 1946-1958 (42.4)
9. Addie Joss 1902-1910 (40.9)
8. Dizzy Dean 1930-1947 (39.6)
7. Chief Bender 1903-1925 (38.5)
6. Burleigh Grimes 1916-1934 (37.2)
5. Herb Pennock 1912-1934 (36.9)
4. Jesse Haines 1918-1937 (33.8)
3. Jack Chesbro 1899-1909 (33.2)
2. Catfish Hunter 1965-1979 (32.5)
1. Rube Marquard 1908-1925 (28.5)
Certainly, some of these players do in fact deserve to be in the Hall of Fame. For players like Lemon, Joss, and Chesbro, their low WAR numbers have a lot to do with the fact that they pitched very well, but over relatively short MLB careers. Joss, in fact, only pitched for nine seasons, yet the Hall of Fame waived the 10-year requirement for him, since he died before the start of his tenth season.
However, for others such as Chief Bender and Jesse Haines, they were not particularly dominating at any point in their careers, yet they were rather inexplicably elected to the Hall of Fame anyway. Haines, for example, never led the league in any significant statistic, and finished with a mediocre 3.64 ERA and just 210 wins, which is fairly low for a Hall of Famer.
According to the list, Rube Marquard is the worst pitcher in the Hall of Fame, and I would tend to agree with this conclusion. With a 201-177 win-loss record, a 103 ERA+, and one season in which he led the NL in wins, there isn't really much that stands out about him, yet he was somehow elected to the Hall of Fame in 1971 anyway.
Interestingly, only one of the players on this list retired fairly recently (Hunter, in 1979); everyone else has been retired for over 50 years. Perhaps the Hall of Fame voters have decided upon stricter standards for pitchers? After all, it took Bert Blyleven 14 years to get elected, and while his stats aren't amazing, they make him look like Cy Young when compared to Rube Marquard. And then there's Luis Tiant, who I still think deserves to be elected, especially when considering some of the ones who have already been elected. But, then again, what is standard for electing someone to the Hall of Fame? Do you just have to be better than the worst person in, or is the standard somewhere above that? We may never know.
No comments:
Post a Comment