Article: A Hall Without Jack Morris Is No Hall at All

[bwille]

You can view the page at http://twinsdaily.com/content.php/2597-A-Hall-Without-Jack-Morris-is-No-Hall-at-All

[Brock Beauchamp]

There are many reasons to be upset with the BBWAA and their voting process.

 

Jack Morris isn't one of them. Bartolo-freakin-Colon has a higher career WAR than ol' Grumpystache.

 

Morris has no business being in a Hall that refuses to elect Alan Trammell, Mike Piazza, Craig Biggio, Jeff Bagwell, and Tim Raines, among others (all are 69+ career WAR players, compared to Morris' 43 WAR... which is lower than Joe Mauer, BTW).

 

And that's not even getting into the PED guys who deserve to be there: Clemens and Bonds, for starters.

 

The problem with the HoF voting is that there are a slew of writers who just aren't very bright. They take moralistic stands on the most bizarre of topics but they can't even stay consistent within their own "rules".

 

How on earth can you vote for Larkin but not Trammell? How can you vote for Jim Rice but not Raines? How can you completely ignore the contributions of the Killer Bs? Hell, Trammell and Raines didn't even play during the PED era. That's no excuse (it shouldn't be an excuse either way but whatever) to leave them off the ballot.

 

And then there's Mike Piazza. The best offensive catcher in history and it's not even really close. Never linked to PED use, played in monster stadiums his entire career, and a hell of a guy to boot. But nah, don't vote for him. This is the Hall of Fame. Not the Hall of... uh... Great?

[Dman]

I have gone back forth about Morris over the years. I am totally biased because of that world series clutch performance. While I think he deserves to get in I also understand there is a line that has to be drawn somewhere. Otherwise the hall gets diluted and means nothing. If you let someone in with a 3.90 ERA then there is an argument for lots of other pitchers.

 

I do agree that stats do not tell the whole story especially given the era in which he pitched. Going deep in games can be more important to a team than an extra run in the pitchers ERA if it is saving the bullpen. Also a couple of bad years at the end of his career inflated that ERA even more.

 

It is a tough call and Morris in on or slightly below line. I think it was a decision that could have gone either way but in the end I can live with the decision that was made. Jack will always be considered a great player whether he is in the hall or not. He will be forever remembered in Minnesota and in my mind for the rest of my life for that amazing game 7 that to me defined who Jack Morris is.

[Mike Sixel]

Not even close to a Hall of Famer.

[Steve Penz]

I am starting to lean towards Morris being in. It is a done deal now but the pros seem to outweigh the cons. Am I nuts? With the amount of innings he threw and the amount of times he went deep into the games it seems that the ERA stat gets diluted. What if he had pitched with a good set up man and a closer so he stopped at 6.1-7 innings/game? Also, he pitched in the American league with a DH for his whole career. So all the pros are stated above in Bwille's ariticle and the cons are WAR and ERA? If what I said about ERA counts and you set that aside, is he in? I must say, I do like that it seems that those who vote no are doing so because they are taking a hard look at stats and that is how it should be. That type of analysis would have Johan with another Cy Young award.

[Thrylos]

There are many reasons to be upset with the BBWAA and their voting process.

 

Jack Morris isn't one of them. Bartolo-freakin-Colon has a higher career WAR than ol' Grumpystache.

 

Kenny Rogers (who was a Minnesota Twin for exactly as long as Morris was) and got a single vote had higher career WAR than Morris. Did not see many cries from the Twin Cities crowd there. Brad Radke had a higher career WAR than Morris. And he was a Twin for life. Did not see many cries there either.

 

The two former Twins who should be in this large inclusive hall are Jim Kaat and Tony Oliva, not the Tiger Jack Morris.

 

And before I forget: The Hall is not "without Jack Morris". There are memorabilia of that game 7 in the Hall. Which is the way it should be because that was one of the best games ever played. This does not mean that Jack Morris is one of the best to ever play the game and should be inducted to the player section. There is a difference.

[Brock Beauchamp]

I am starting to lean towards Morris being in. It is a done deal now but the pros seem to outweigh the cons. Am I nuts? With the amount of innings he threw and the amount of times he went deep into the games it seems that the ERA stat gets diluted. What if he had pitched with a good set up man and a closer so he stopped at 6.1-7 innings/game? Also, he pitched in the American league with a DH for his whole career. So all the pros are stated above in Bwille's ariticle and the cons are WAR and ERA? If what I said about ERA counts and you set that aside, is he in? I must say, I do like that it seems that those who vote no are doing so because they are taking a hard look at stats and that is how it should be. That type of analysis would have Johan with another Cy Young award.

 

Jamie Moyer pitched 250 more innings than Morris and had a higher career WAR. They had virtually the same ERA+. And Moyer did it in the middle of the PED era when pitchers were pulled after six innings.

 

Jack Morris was a good pitcher. He was not a great one.

[OldManWinter]

How many present HOF'rs needed to pass the litmus test of WAR comparisons? That is a new standard.

 

Of course Jack Morris belongs in the HOF!

 

His numbers may not be as high as some, but he accomplished some pretty remarkable feats in his lengthy career.

 

Somebody presently installed in The Hall now has the highest ERA, lowest win total, most errors, slowest fastball, poorest ball to strike ratio, lowest batting average, fewest HR's, et all!

 

None of that matters.

 

You cannot compare greatness by digesting a set of numbers. The numbers never do justice to Jack Morris' type of accomplishments.

[tobi0040]

Not even close to a Hall of Famer.

 

I am a big fan of Jack Morris. He will always hold a special place in our hearts and he is a great guy, but his numbers are just not there.

 

Here are his numbers against six pitchers that will get in, all up recently or in the next year:

WP ERA WHIP K/9

 

Jack Morris .577 3.90 1.29 5.8

 

Randy Johnson .646 3.29 1.17 10.6

 

Pedro Martinez .687 2.93 1.05 10.0

 

Curt Schilling .597 3.46 1.13 8.6

 

Tom Glavine .600 3.54 1.31 5.3

 

Greg Maddux .610 3.16 1.14 6.1

 

John Smoltz .594* 3.33 1.18 8.0

 

*win percentage as a starter

 

 

Morris is last in win percentage, ERA by far, and six of seven in WHIP and K/9

[thetank]

I am starting to lean towards Morris being in. It is a done deal now but the pros seem to outweigh the cons. Am I nuts? With the amount of innings he threw and the amount of times he went deep into the games it seems that the ERA stat gets diluted. What if he had pitched with a good set up man and a closer so he stopped at 6.1-7 innings/game? Also, he pitched in the American league with a DH for his whole career. So all the pros are stated above in Bwille's ariticle and the cons are WAR and ERA? If what I said about ERA counts and you set that aside, is he in? I must say, I do like that it seems that those who vote no are doing so because they are taking a hard look at stats and that is how it should be. That type of analysis would have Johan with another Cy Young award.

 

Looking at his career splits he did better in the 2nd half of the season than the first. Excellent Sept/Oct numbers. Will have to be up to the Veterans Committee now. If he could have pitched more shutouts, won a Cy Young, and had a few more wins...

[Brock Beauchamp]

How many present HOF'rs needed to pass the litmus test of WAR comparisons? That is a new standard.

 

Not many, because WAR didn't exist.

 

But it says a lot that the overwhelming majority of them pass with flying colors.

 

If some of you think Morris should be in the Hall due to his postseason performances, so be it. I don't agree but there is a case to be made for such players.

 

But don't try to pass off his career numbers as Hall-worthy. They simply aren't.

 

Again, Jamie Moyer compares favorably to Jack Morris. Jamie-freakin-Moyer. Think about that for a moment.

[Mike Sixel]

The numbers exactly state how he actually pitched, not how we remember him pitching. That's the beauty of the numbers.....they tell an unbiased truth.

 

He allowed more runs to score than other good or great pitchers. He did not "pitch to the score", that analysis has been done over and over. He "won" a lot of games (dumbest stat in sports, probably) because his offense scored a ton of runs.

 

The numbers are exactly how you should MEASURE if someone was good at their job.

[OldManWinter]

And, I agree with Thrylos, I would have put both Tony O and Kaat in the HOF.

 

No doubt there are other snubs, more or less apparent.

 

My reasoning is that the HOF is not merely for carbon copies of the same great players. There is room for more than one type of greatness.

[markos]

And before I forget: The Hall is not "without Jack Morris". There are memorabilia of that game 7 in the Hall. Which is the way it should be because that was one of the best games ever played. This does not mean that Jack Morris is one of the best to ever play the game and should be inducted to the player section. There is a difference.

 

This.

 

Jack Morris is already memorialized in the Hall of Fame for having one of the greatest World Series pitching performances in one of the greatest World Series games in one of the greatest World Series in baseball history. He was not one of the greatest pitchers of all time. So he is already in the Hall for exactly the reason that he should be.

[108 Double Stitches]

I think starting pitching evaluation for the HOF is pretty harsh. There seems to more and more disparity between how careers are evaluated and how a GM is evaluated after a free agent signing or a trade is made. And the HOF analysis is looking, well, dated.

 

This might be a controversial opinion, but I will throw it out there anyway. There are three LF from Fenway in HOF. A lot of statistics make them look really good. But if you had traded the #3 on the list (Jim Rice) for Jack Morris, how would view the General Manager in hindsight? How about for Yaz? I think I would take Jack Morris, not because he was better than other pitching HOF canidates, but because its a commodity that is harder to replace.

 

It worked out well for two separate teams to pick up Morris as a free agent. I rather doubt Rice or even Yaz could have had the same impact. If you wanted to see the best HOF stats, you would be totally wrong to take on Morris. But if you wanted to win,...

 

So you could really say that my opinion is that the HOF has too many corner OFers and not enough starting pitching. Kind of the like the Twins over the last 3 years. I am not saying that Morris is more deserving than some of the other canidates. I am saying more starting pitching canidates are deserving. Pretty much after what we have been seeing, for the 2014 Twins I would take any of the pitchers that have been mentioned over another corner OF.

[Brock Beauchamp]

My reasoning is that the HOF is not merely for carbon copies of the same great players. There is room for more than one type of greatness.

 

Sure there is. That's why Rickey Henderson, Sandy Koufax, Ozzie Smith, and Babe Ruth are in the same Hall of Fame.

 

All vastly different players. All the best in the game at one particular skillset during their careers. Jack Morris lacks the most important quality shared between them, and that is "greatness".

[Thrylos]

I am a big fan of Jack Morris. He will always hold a special place in our hearts and he is a great guy, but his numbers are just not there.

 

Here are his numbers against six pitchers that will get in, all up recently or in the next year:

WP ERA WHIP K/9

 

Jack Morris .577 3.90 1.29 5.8

 

Randy Johnson .646 3.29 1.17 10.6

 

Pedro Martinez .687 2.93 1.05 10.0

 

Curt Schilling .597 3.46 1.13 8.6

 

Tom Glavine .600 3.54 1.31 5.3

 

Greg Maddux .610 3.16 1.14 6.1

 

John Smoltz .594* 3.33 1.18 8.0

 

*win percentage as a starter

 

 

Morris is last in win percentage, ERA by far, and six of seven in WHIP and K/9

 

Interestingly enough, the closest comparable from his time in ERA, WHIP, K/9 and K/BB is this guy:

 

Morris: 3.90 ERA, 1.296 WHIP, 5.8 K/9, 1.8 K/BB (3824 IP)

Mystery Pitcher: 3.75 ERA, 1.302 WHIP, 5.6 K/9, 1.4 K/BB (3801 IP)

 

Eerily similar numbers.

Is Charlie Hough a Hall of Famer?

[Thor]

Morris made 14 opening day starts. 3 of those teams won the World Series. It isn't rocket science, it's baseball where you send your best pitcher out on opening day. The best pitcher 14 years for good teams was Jack.

[thetank]

Kenny Rogers (who was a Minnesota Twin for exactly as long as Morris was) and got a single vote had higher career WAR than Morris. Did not see many cries from the Twin Cities crowd there. Brad Radke had a higher career WAR than Morris. And he was a Twin for life. Did not see many cries there either.

 

The two former Twins who should be in this large inclusive hall are Jim Kaat and Tony Oliva, not the Tiger Jack Morris.

 

And before I forget: The Hall is not "without Jack Morris". There are memorabilia of that game 7 in the Hall. Which is the way it should be because that was one of the best games ever played. This does not mean that Jack Morris is one of the best to ever play the game and should be inducted to the player section. There is a difference.

 

Tony Oliva only had 1900 or so hits. He was a DH for the last 4 years. He was injury-proned as well. Kaat could have had one more 25 win season somewhere. Looks like the voters were making a stand and Kaat's ERA+ is better than Morris though you think of Morris as your ace year after year.

[OldManWinter]

Koufax is a really high standard to surpass.

 

Would Don Drysdale or Robin Roberts and many others be in the HOF if they needed to meet that standard?

[Otto von Ballpark]

Morris' "era" isn't 1979-1992. That's the exact prime of his career, and a textbook example of selective endpoints.

 

Then you compare him to pitchers who debuted between 1970 and 1984 -- how did you come up with that? (Also, it appears to mean AFTER 1970 and BEFORE 1984, as Blyleven debuted in 1970 and Clemens debuted in 1984 and both of those guys beat Morris by a mile.)

 

Look, I love me some Morris, I think Game 7 was great, and I wouldn't be upset to see him get in, but I don't think it's any kind of injustice. I mean, outside of his iconic moment, the best justification seems to be the HOF should have a starting pitcher debut in every X year period. (Anybody find a nice HOF list sorted by birth year?) There were a lot of great SP debuting in the 1960s and 1980s, they just seemed to skip debuts in the 1970s for the most part. Heck, even Morris didn't debut until 1977 or establish himself until 1979. The great lasting pitchers of the 1970s debuted in the 1960s, and the great lasting pitchers of the 1980s debuted in 1984 or later (or were holdovers from 1960s debuts).

 

I don't know why that is, but if you look at yearly top 10 leaderboards at Baseball Reference, the late 70s / early 80s look a little thin. Heck, Morris doesn't even appear on many of those.

[Brock Beauchamp]

Koufax is a really high standard to surpass.

 

Would Don Drysdale or Robin Roberts and many others be in the HOF if they needed to meet that standard?

 

I didn't say they had to pass the Koufax standard. I listed four great players with incredibly diverse skill sets to counter your argument that different players deserve to be in the hall. The common trait between those four is greatness... A trait that Jack Morris did not consistently show during his career.

[Marta Shearing]

There are many reasons to be upset with the BBWAA and their voting process.

 

Jack Morris isn't one of them. Bartolo-freakin-Colon has a higher career WAR than ol' Grumpystache.

 

Morris has no business being in a Hall that refuses to elect Alan Trammell, Mike Piazza, Craig Biggio, Jeff Bagwell, and Tim Raines, among others (all are 69+ career WAR players, compared to Morris' 43 WAR... which is lower than Joe Mauer, BTW).

 

And that's not even getting into the PED guys who deserve to be there: Clemens and Bonds, for starters.

 

The problem with the HoF voting is that there are a slew of writers who just aren't very bright. They take moralistic stands on the most bizarre of topics but they can't even stay consistent within their own "rules".

 

How on earth can you vote for Larkin but not Trammell? How can you vote for Jim Rice but not Raines? How can you completely ignore the contributions of the Killer Bs? Hell, Trammell and Raines didn't even play during the PED era. That's no excuse (it shouldn't be an excuse either way but whatever) to leave them off the ballot.

 

And then there's Mike Piazza. The best offensive catcher in history and it's not even really close. Never linked to PED use, played in monster stadiums his entire career, and a hell of a guy to boot. But nah, don't vote for him. This is the Hall of Fame. Not the Hall of... uh... Great?

Thats your opinion and I respect it, but there is so much more than numbers involved here. Anyone from his era who watched him pitch knows he's a hall of famer. So many people today whose only connection to Morris is video of him striking out Ron Gant and crunching numbers on their laptop. Numbers dont do him justice, and when you add in his postseason resume, it just floors me he cant get in.

[Brock Beauchamp]

Morris made 14 opening day starts. 3 of those teams won the World Series. It isn't rocket science, it's baseball where you send your best pitcher out on opening day. The best pitcher 14 years for good teams was Jack.

 

"Opening Day starter" and "best pitcher" are not synonymous. There are a host of reasons not to start your "best pitcher" on Opening Day:

 

1. He might be injured.

 

2. He might be in the minors.

 

3. He might be young and you want to defer the pressure of Opening Day to a veteran.

 

4. You might trust a particular veteran more than another.

 

Continue ad nauseum.

[Brad Swanson]

Thats your opinion and I respect it, but there is so much more than numbers involved here. Anyone from his era who watched him pitch knows he's a hall of famer. So many people today whose only connection to Morris is video of him striking out Ron Gant and crunching numbers on their laptop. Numbers dont do him justice, and when you add in his postseason resume, it just floors me he cant get in.

 

If he's so great, why don't the numbers do him justice? I'm sorry, but that makes no sense to me.

[Brock Beauchamp]

Thats your opinion and I respect it, but there is so much more than numbers involved here. Anyone from his era who watched him pitch knows he's a hall of famer. So many people today whose only connection to Morris is video of him striking out Ron Gant and crunching numbers on their laptop. Numbers dont do him justice, and when you add in his postseason resume, it just floors me he cant get in.

 

The numbers do tell the entire story. Jack Morris was a pitcher whose career is comparable to Charlie Hough, Jamie Moyer, and players of that ilk. Very good pitchers who pitched for a very long time but were not consistently dominant. And that's fine. I'm not taking anything away from Morris, particularly his postseason accomplishments. He was a very good pitcher. Not a great one, unless you want to really weight his postseason accomplishments. During the regular season, he was merely a good pitcher.

 

And for the record, I watched many games pitched by Jack Morris. The difference is that I'm not letting a handful of games distort my view of who he was as a pitcher.

[Brad Swanson]

I also reject the notion that a player is either a Hall of Famer or just a commoner. Can't Jack Morris be a great player, but not worthy of the Hall of Fame? That doesn't mean he's some Joe Mays-level player, but it also doesn't mean he belongs with Bert Blyleven and the other pitchers who were just better than Morris.

[Steve Penz]

This.

 

Jack Morris is already memorialized in the Hall of Fame for having one of the greatest World Series pitching performances in one of the greatest World Series games in one of the greatest World Series in baseball history. He was not one of the greatest pitchers of all time. So he is already in the Hall for exactly the reason that he should be.

 

 

 

Nice. Thanks for the other comments after my previous post. Heaven forbid I look that stuff up on my own.

[DAM DC Twins Fans]

Kenny Rogers (who was a Minnesota Twin for exactly as long as Morris was) and got a single vote had higher career WAR than Morris. Did not see many cries from the Twin Cities crowd there. Brad Radke had a higher career WAR than Morris. And he was a Twin for life. Did not see many cries there either.

 

The two former Twins who should be in this large inclusive hall are Jim Kaat and Tony Oliva, not the Tiger Jack Morris

 

I cant believe how often this off season I am agreeing with Thrylos...but he is right. Jack Morris is borderline HOF. Jim Kaat belongs there. Kaat has the most wins of any pitcher not in the HOF. IMHO he was the best fielding pitcher of my lifetime. I am not a big believer in WAR so I cant tell you how he stands there.

 

Morris is among a group of pitchers who are borderline including Mussina, Schilling, etc. Now I will be more upset if those two get in than I am now. I would have voted for Morris but his omission is not a big deal.

[Brock Beauchamp]

Why are we wasting time on this board discussing Jack Morris? He was the past, let's talk about the future of the Twins, to me that is much more productive and interesting.

 

Feel free to not discuss a topic you don't find interesting. There are going to be things some people want to talk about that don't interest you.