Search the Community

Last summer, the Twins organization elected Joe Nathan to the Twins Hall of Fame, a well-deserved honor for the former All-Star closer. Nathan was tremendous during his time in a Twins uniform and his eyes should be set on an even more prestigious Hall of Fame, the one located in Cooperstown, NY. Hall of Fame players are not one-size fits all and, for many, the path to the Hall includes excellence over a long period of time. Joe Nathan’s play over the last decade is certainly going to warrant some consideration for the Hall, but there could be some obstacles awaiting him on his path to enshrinement. Much like current Twin Nelson Cruz, Nathan didn’t become a big league regular until late into his 20s. Minnesota traded for him in one of the best trades in franchise history and he immediately became one of the best closers in the game. Unfortunately for Nathan, relief pitchers are underrepresented in the Cooperstown’s hallowed halls. The current HOF relievers are Dennis Eckersley, Mariano Rivera, Hoyt Wilhelm, Rich Gossage, Lee Smith, Bruce Sutter, Trevor Hoffman, and Rollie Fingers. Currently, Billy Wagner has been slowly gaining traction on the HOF ballot. In his fifth year of eligibility, his named was penciled in on 31.7% of the writer’s ballots. This was up 25% from the 2019 ballot where he finished with 16.7% of the vote. Back in 2017, his first year on the ballot, he was only on 10.5% of the ballots. FanGraphs Jay Jaffe named Wagner and Nathan as the two best relief pitchers outside the Hall. Both Wagner and Nathan are within 1.0 WAR of each other, but Nathan has 1.5 more WPA. While these players put up strong numbers in their era, however, each falls sort of the HOF average for WAR (39.1). Rivera and Eckersley shift the WAR average significantly as they averaged over 59 WAR between the two of them alone. One way to measure a player’s Hall of Fame worthiness is Jaffe’s scoring system known as JAWS. According to Baseball Reference, a player’s JAWS is their career WAR averaged with their 7-year peak WAR. To examine Nathan, one must compare him to the other relievers already elected to the Hall. JAWS has Nathan ranked closely to other Hall of Fame relievers. Smith and Sutter rank just above him and Hoffman is two spots behind him with Wagner being between Nathan and Hoffman. Overall, Jaffe places Wagner and Nathan in his top-7 overall relief pitchers through his hybrid average of WAR, WPA, and situational or context-neutral wins (WPA/LI). If Wagner can garner enough support to be elected, Nathan should have the opportunity as well. Nathan has other statistics that could help his Cooperstown case. Even with his late debut, he was able to pitch into his early 40’s. Along the way, he was elected to six All-Star teams, finished in the top-5 of Cy Young voting twice, struck out more than a batter per inning and he finished in the top-5 in saves five times. Overall, he’s eighth in career saves and he had five seasons with a 1.88 ERA or lower. Much like Wagner, it is going to be a tough road to Cooperstown. Wagner continues to gain support and Nathan is close to Wagner in many categories. Will Nathan be able to stay on the ballot and eventually be on the stage in Cooperstown? We will have to wait until 2022 to find out. MORE FROM TWINS DAILY — Latest Twins coverage from our writers — Recent Twins discussion in our forums — Follow Twins Daily via Twitter, Facebook or email View full article

Debating the resumes of Hall candidates has become contentious in recent years. The steroid era clouded the results of this hallowed ground. Two players, Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens, might have been the all-time best hitter and pitcher. Neither has gotten the call from Cooperstown. This year’s class is shaping up to be one of the biggest in history. Two players, Lee Smith and Harold Baines, have already been elected by the 16-member electorate of the Today’s Game Era ballot. If I was lucky enough to have a ballot, this is how I would vote.Class of 2019 Roy Halladay: Tragically, Halladay won’t be in Cooperstown to give an acceptance speech. He crashed his plane into the Gulf of Mexico in November 2017. Halladay might be the last pitcher of a former era. He compiled 67 complete games in his career and he needed fewer than 100 pitches in 14 of those complete games. Halladay won two Cy Young awards (2003, 2010) and he finished in the top-five another five times. There may not be another pitcher like Halladay. Edgar Martinez: With the recent election of Baines, it makes no sense to keep Martinez out of the hall. He is one of the best designated hitters of all-time and he is in his final year on the ballot. Paul Molitor spend 44% of his career playing DH and Frank Thomas spend 57% of his career at DH. Both have been elected to the Hall. He received over 70% of the vote in 2018 so he should easily break the 75% threshold in the current election cycle. Mariano Rivera: Rivera utilized one of the best pitches, a cut fastball, in baseball history to become one of the best pitchers in baseball history. He set the all-time record for saves (652) but he might be most remembered for his dominance during postseason play. He was part of five World Series winners and he collected the final outs in four of those championship seasons. Rivera was also a great influence off the field and he could end up with one of the highest voting percentages in Hall of Fame history. Future Inductions Mike Mussina: Mussina’s long career stacks up well, especially when compared to the era that he pitched in. Other pitchers from the era have garnered more recognition but Mussina was strong throughout his career. In one 10-year stretch, he received Cy Young votes in eight different seasons. After finishing at 63.5% in 2018, he’s going to be borderline this year to get in. I think he has to wait one more year and he will be part of the Class of 2020. Omar Vizquel: Vizquel follows the mold of Ozzie Smith in the fact that nearly all of his value came on the defensive side of the ball. Think of him as the anti-Edgar Martinez, whose value came completely on the offensive side. His 11 Gold Gloves at shortstop are second most all-time behind Smith. Smith was a first ballot Hall of Famer. Every shortstop ahead of him on the all-time hits lists is enshrined in Cooperstown or on their way. He should get in, but he will need to gain more support in the years to come. May Never Get In (But Still On My Ballot) Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens, Larry Walker, Andrew Jones, Todd Helton Bonds and Clemens are two of the greatest players of all time but their connection to the steroid era has kept them out of Cooperstown. Walker continues to gain ground, but recent crowded ballots have kept him from getting elected. He is in his ninth year of eligibility, which means 2020 will be his last opportunity on the writer’s ballot. Jones is a long way from being elected in his second year on the ballot. He is one of the best defensive players of all-time and I think he will can some traction in the years ahead. Helton gets little support due to playing his entire career in Colorado. Still his offensive accolades put him on the borderline for enshrinement. To be transparent, some things have changed on my ballot from last year to this year. I correctly predicted the four players who would be elected last year (Vladimir Guerrero, Trevor Hoffman, Chipper Jones, and Jim Thome). I have replaced those four players on this year’s ballot with two first time candidates (Halladay, Rivera), while adding three new candidates (Walker, Jones, and Helton). Johan Santana fell off the ballot in his first year of eligibility, but I tried to make his case in a series of posts last year. If you missed any of the series on Johan Santana’s Cooperstown Case, there were three parts to the series. The first post looked at the Kirby Puckett Clause and how it can be applied to Santana. The second article touched on the similarities in careers between Santana and the great Sandy Koufax. The third and final piece touched on his missing third Cy Young. Here is the official list of players available to be voted for by the BBWAA. Who makes your list? Leave a COMMENT and start the discussion. Click here to view the article

On Tuesday night, Bartolo Colon will take the mound at Target Field for his first start in a large Minnesota Twins uniform. If you’re like me, one of the first things that you thought about when you heard that the Twins signed the 44-year-old right-hander last week was the 2005 American League Cy Young Award. As you recall, Colon won that award because he went 21-8 for the Angels. He was the only 20-game winner in the league that year. As Twins fans, we thought that Johan Santana was robbed. Yes, Moneyball had already been out for a few years, so we knew that there was much more to illustrating how well a pitcher throws than the almighty pitcher Win.With Colon joining the Twins and making a start tonight, I thought it would be fun to take a look back at that 2005 American League Cy Young vote through the lens of what we now know. Was Johan still robbed? Of course he was robbed, we’re Twins fans. He absolutely deserved to win it. Santana won the AL Cy Young Award in 2004, and then he again won it in 2006. However, we’ll still contend that he should have won three in a row. The Vote I always find it interesting that we think that Johan Santana was robbed. However, we forget that Santana didn’t even finish runner-up in the 2005 American League Cy Young voting. Yankees closer Mariano Rivera finished second in the vote. Bartolo Colon actually won the vote quite handily. He accumulated 118 points. Mariano Rivera had 68 points, and Johan Santana had 51 points. Colon received 17 of a possible 28 first-place votes. Rivera got eight first-place votes with Santana tallying the other three. The Numbers Let’s start with the obvious, the statistics. First and foremost, it is important to acknowledge that all three of these pitchers had tremendous 2005 seasons. I don’t think anyone would or should say anything differently. At the same time, it’s impossible to look at the numbers and not think that Santana was the obvious choice. Here are some key statistics for your consideration: W-L Record: Colon 21-8; Santana 16-7, Rivera 7-4 (with 43 saves)Innings Pitched: Santana 231.2, Colon 222.2, Rivera 78.1ERA: Rivera 1.38, Santana 2.87, Colon 3.48WHIP: Rivera 0.87, Santana 0.97, Colon 1.16.FIP: Rivera 2.15, Santana 2.80, Colon 3.75K/9: Santana 9.2, Rivera 9.2, Colon 6.3BB/9: Santana 1.7, Colon 1.7, Rivera 2.1bWAR: Santana 7.2, Colon 4.0, Rivera 4.0.fWAR: Santana 7.1, Colon 4.1, Rivera 2.9WPA: Santana 4.16, Rivera 3.15, Colon 2.77So what does this tell us? Well, that depends on how much you value a closer. Rivera was totally dominant, as he was for most of his Hall of Fame career. But he threw just 78.1 innings compared to over 220 innings for Colon and Santana. But Rivera was the one that most nationally (and particularly in New York) thought was snubbed. In fact, when asked, Colon thought Rivera had a good chance to win. “"Mariano had a great year," Colon said, thanking Rivera for teaching him how to throw his cut fastball. "I did think about the fact that maybe he was going to come away and be the winner."” However, if you were to compare just the starting pitchers, there really is no comparison. The only area where Colon had a better number was the wins category. We don’t need to go through the whole discussion about how meaningless that number is. Fielding Independent Pitching (FIP) had Santana clearly better. Why? Because Santana struck out 50% more batters than Colon. You can make an argument about a strikeout pitcher needing more pitches. In an ESPN article back then, “If I can get an out with one or two pitches and use my sinker or my cutter, I'm better off," Colon said through a translator. "I stopped being a village boy, thinking that I can throw any stone, any rock through a wall, and started thinking about being a guy that could last longer, to take some off my fastball and not to depend only on throwing hard.” Well, that may be fine, but in the same number of starts, Santana threw more innings. He gave up fewer runs, walked the same low number, and Santana had a WHIP under 1.00, which is crazy good for a starter. So whether you look at the more traditional stats like ERA and WHIP and K/9, Santana was clearly better. If you look at the more advanced stats like FIP, WAR (wins above replacement) or even WPA (win probability added). If wins are your stat of choice for a pitcher, well, then Colon was the rightful winner. In a New York Times article discussing the 2005 vote, Akron Beacon writer Sheldon Ocker acknowledged that he put Rivera and other relievers into the MVP candidates more than the Cy Young because they are used more often but for a lot less innings. His comment regarding why his ballot went 1.) Bartolo Colon, 2.) Cliff Lee, 3.) Mark Buehrle illustrates the thinking of the writers who voted for these awards just a dozen years ago. “It's just a whole different animal from starting pitchers," he added. "If the best starting pitcher in the league only won 15 games and Mariano Rivera or someone else saved 45, I'd vote for Rivera. But in a season with a 20-game winner and an 18-game winner, I felt the starters should get my vote.” Wins. Wins… That’s a pretty direct indictment on how Bartolo Colon won that award over Johan Santana. How Egregious? While obviously Twins fans are a bit biased, it’s fun to check out a couple of national sites and blogs and get some other opinions. Bleacher Report posted an article in which they determined the 10 most undeserving Cy Young Award winners. Bartolo Colon came in at #6. “The more deserving candidate was Johan Santana, who went 16-7, with an ERA of 2.87 and led the league in WAR and ERA-plus with a 6.3 and a 155 respectively. Santana also struck out the most batters by a wide margin and had a ridiculous .97 WHIP.” Seamheads posted and article called the Most Egregious Cy Young Snubs. Colon/Santana was only mentioned in saying that if they had listed 11 instead of 10, they would have made the list. So while most thought that Santana should have won it, statistics tell us that the voters got it wrong on several occasions. Stark Summary Shortly after Colon was awarded the 2005 AL Cy Young, ESPN’s Jayson Stark wrote an article highlighting why Santana, not Colon, deserved to win the award. Here are a few excerpts from the article: Colon finished strong, going 10-2 in his last 14 starts “for a team that needed every one of his wins to hold off Oakland.”Colon was helped out by his bullpen which blew zero saves for him.Indians hitters averaged 6.02 runs per game when Colon started.“Santana piled up 81 more strikeouts, beat Colon in ERA by 61 points, allowed almost two fewer base runners for every nine innings, and had more innings pitched, complete games and shutouts.”“Hitters who faced Colon had a batting average of .254 against him. The on-base percentage against Santana was .250.”“Colon got a ridiculous 1.32 more runs per game than Santana did. And Santana’s totals in his last three no-decisions tell it all: 23 innings, 9 hits, 3 runs, 0 wins.”“But the history of the award tells us that no starting pitcher has won just 16 games over a full season and won a Cy Young.”Of course, that has changed some since 2005. In 2009, Zack Greinke (16) and Tim Lincecum (15) were the two Cy Young winners. In 2010, Felix Hernandez won the AL award with a 13-12 record. In 2013, Clayton Kershaw won the NL Cy Young with 16 wins. So while there are more ways to determine and vote for Best Pitcher, it will continue to be dependent upon the 15 BBWAA writers from each league that cast their vote. I don’t think anyone is going to expect Bartolo Colon to come to Target Field today and hand over that 2005 Cy Young Award. And frankly, there’s no reason to bring it up. Instead, let’s cheer on Colon and hope beyond hope that he can be a solid contributor to the Twins for the rest of the season. Or, he’ll be so bad that Derek Falvey and Thad Levine will have an easy decision to let him go in the next few weeks. If nothing else, it’ll be fun to watch the oldest pitcher to make a start for the Twins in their 57 seasons in Minnesota. Click here to view the article