Poll: HOF discussion continues...Moose vs. Blyleven

Topnotchsy · Jan 14, 2009

Would love to hear opinions. I keep hearing people argue for Blyleven (something I still haven't figured out) and most people I've heard do not seem to think Moose is an HOFer. I'd love to hear what people think (and would love to hear some possible reason that Blyleven should get in before Moose as I can't see a single thing in the stats that would make me think that.

Enlighten me...

edit: taken from post below, I know some don't read the whole thread so here's the argument:

Topnotchsy said:
Looks like I'm going to have to argue my case.

W/L
Moose: 270-153
Blyleven 287-250

(For those who are interested the difference is 17-97, a huge difference.)

ERA+ (a number that views ERA compared to league ERA at the time, a very telling stat)
Moose: 123 (ERA .83 better than league average)
Blyleven: 118 (ERA .59 better than league average)

Shutouts have been mentioned, and while they do favor Blyleven, that is simply partially a product of the era he played in.

K's have also been mentioned, but no mention is made of the fact that Moose has a higher K/9 than Blyleven. Moose's is 7.11 per 9 innings, Blyleven 6.33 per 9 innings (almost a full K per inning better for his career.) Moose also has a better K/BB ratio than Blyleven.

Moose also had 7 gold gloves as well as 5 AS games. Blyleven has zero gold gloves and two AS games.

Mussina was in the top 6 in CY voting 9 times, Blyleven just t3 times.

I am completely shocked that people do not agree with me. Blyleven has 1 thing on Moose, and that's that he played far longer. (In 1400 more innings he has just 17 more wins, and 97 more losses, can it be more obvious?)

Anyone care to counter these numbers?

Pete14Rose · Jan 14, 2009

Re: HOF discussion continues...Moose vs. Blyleven

Blyleven -

I voted and am in no mood to debate.

Focker, Out!

jbone17 · Jan 14, 2009

Re: HOF discussion continues...Moose vs. Blyleven

Byleven simply because the man has 3,701k's for his career and he has 287 wins if I am not mistaken. As much as I like Moose and I am a Yankee fan, Moose will only get in based on the way he played the game. Byleven should be in and since he is not than there is no way that Moose shuld be a HOF'er.

pujolsthomefan33 · Jan 14, 2009

Re: HOF discussion continues...Moose vs. Blyleven

I would vote, but honestly, dont believe either one should really really be in the HOF. I guess if you made me choose I would probably say Blyleven base purely on wins, strikeouts, etc. I think Moose could go either way, and it definitely wont hurt him that he is a Yankee, I just think there are too many other pitchers that overshadow him and were just as good if not better for longer.

Since you made the post Blyleven vs. Moose, I voted for Blyleven...see above.

TK

Tomlinson21RB · Jan 14, 2009

Re: HOF discussion continues...Moose vs. Blyleven

Career K's in favor of Blyleven (3701 vs 2813)
Career W's in favor of Blyleven (287 vs 270)
Career ERA in favor of Blyleven (3.31 vs 3.68)
Career Shutouts in favor of Blyleven (60 vs 23)

jcmint · Jan 14, 2009

Re: HOF discussion continues...Moose vs. Blyleven

I like Bly to get in but it can be argued that neither was ever considered the best of their time. To me Moose is just shy while Bly should be in. IMO

wolfmanalfredo · Jan 14, 2009

Re: HOF discussion continues...Moose vs. Blyleven

Tomlinson21RB said:
Career K's in favor of Blyleven (3701 vs 2813)
Career W's in favor of Blyleven (287 vs 270)
Career ERA in favor of Blyleven (3.31 vs 3.68)
Career Shutouts in favor of Blyleven (60 vs 23)

Exactly what I was going to post, well deserved +1.

The only pitcher in the HOF that is beating blyleven in all those categories is Nolan Ryan if I'm not mistaken. When he retired he was 3rd on the all time K list. He's still 5th.

I know it was a different time, but 200+ complete games, cmon thats impressive.

People Say he's an accumulator, and I know that can be argued, but I say there is a difference between accumulation and longevity.

I'm biased but you know where my vote went.

When he retired many including myself though he was a 1st ballot HOFer

MaineMule · Jan 14, 2009

Re: HOF discussion continues...Moose vs. Blyleven

Blyleven has 2 rings too and pitched well in the post season........he should be in and fast!

I do think what Mussina accomplished in the AL East during this era is HOF worthy......

fengzhang · Jan 14, 2009

Re: HOF discussion continues...Moose vs. Blyleven

The biggest difference b/w Blyleven and Mussina is the career ERA, almost a 0.4 difference which is huge. If Mussina makes it, he would have the second highest career ERA of any pitcher in the Hall.

I think of both of them as borderline HOFers. I wouldn't be upset if they make it or do not make it into the HOF. Neither was really a standout, had many all-star appearances, or won any Cy Youngs. They pitched a long time and got their wins.

Topnotchsy · Jan 14, 2009

Re: HOF discussion continues...Moose vs. Blyleven

Looks like I'm going to have to argue my case.

W/L
Moose: 270-153
Blyleven 287-250

(For those who are interested the difference is 17-97, a huge difference.)

ERA+ (a number that views ERA compared to league ERA at the time, a very telling stat)
Moose: 123 (ERA .83 better than league average)
Blyleven: 118 (ERA .59 better than league average)

Shutouts have been mentioned, and while they do favor Blyleven, that is simply partially a product of the era he played in.

K's have also been mentioned, but no mention is made of the fact that Moose has a higher K/9 than Blyleven. Moose's is 7.11 per 9 innings, Blyleven 6.33 per 9 innings (almost a full K per inning better for his career.) Moose also has a better K/BB ratio than Blyleven.

Moose also had 7 gold gloves as well as 5 AS games. Blyleven has zero gold gloves and two AS games.

Mussina was in the top 6 in CY voting 9 times, Blyleven just t3 times.

I am completely shocked that people do not agree with me. Blyleven has 1 thing on Moose, and that's that he played far longer. (In 1400 more innings he has just 17 more wins, and 97 more losses, can it be more obvious?)

Anyone care to counter these numbers?

MaineMule · Jan 14, 2009

Re: HOF discussion continues...Moose vs. Blyleven

Topnotchsy said:
Looks like I'm going to have to argue my case.

W/L
Moose: 270-153
Blyleven 287-250

(For those who are interested the difference is 17-97, a huge difference.)

ERA+ (a number that views ERA compared to league ERA at the time, a very telling stat)
Moose: 123 (ERA .83 better than league average)
Blyleven: 118 (ERA .59 better than league average)

Shutouts have been mentioned, and while they do favor Blyleven, that is simply partially a product of the era he played in.

K's have also been mentioned, but no mention is made of the fact that Moose has a higher K/9 than Blyleven. Moose's is 7.11 per 9 innings, Blyleven 6.33 per 9 innings (almost a full K per inning better for his career.) Moose also has a better K/BB ratio than Blyleven.

Moose also had 7 gold gloves as well as 5 AS games. Blyleven has zero gold gloves and two AS games.

Mussina was in the top 6 in CY voting 9 times, Blyleven just t3 times.

I am completely shocked that people do not agree with me. Blyleven has 1 thing on Moose, and that's that he played far longer. (In 1400 more innings he has just 17 more wins, and 97 more losses, can it be more obvious?)

Anyone care to counter these numbers?

I'm not stark mad that Bert is not in but as I mentioned before he had pretty good post-season success and that goes a long way for me. Bert was 5-1 in the post season while Mussina was 7-8.

Also look at the teams Bert played on versus Moose. Mooese played on decent Orioles and very strong Yankee teams. Bert played on some dogs....

Check out complete games (and I know different eras):
Blyleven 242
Mussina 57

Craig - 21hawk · Jan 14, 2009

Re: HOF discussion continues...Moose vs. Blyleven

Topnotchsy said:
Looks like I'm going to have to argue my case.

W/L
Moose: 270-153
Blyleven 287-250

(For those who are interested the difference is 17-97, a huge difference.)

Moose played for the Orioles when they were good in the 90's and then for the Yankees. Teams Blyleven played for: the Twins of the mid to late seventies, the early eighties Indians, the mid eighties Twins (yes they won the WS in 87, but they only won 85 games that year). You swap the teams each played for and Blyleven has the better W/L.

ERA+ (a number that views ERA compared to league ERA at the time, a very telling stat)
Moose: 123 (ERA .83 better than league average)
Blyleven: 118 (ERA .59 better than league average)

If Moose has a year at 41 like Blyleven did their ERA+ will be almost identical.

Shutouts have been mentioned, and while they do favor Blyleven, that is simply partially a product of the era he played in. So he should be penalized for AVERAGING 20 more IP per season over his career than Moose?

K's have also been mentioned, but no mention is made of the fact that Moose has a higher K/9 than Blyleven. Moose's is 7.11 per 9 innings, Blyleven 6.33 per 9 innings (almost a full K per inning better for his career.) Moose also has a better K/BB ratio than Blyleven. That'll happen when you have 185 more CG in your career. You need to get a few more quick ground ball outs. Think about that number for a second 185. Roy Halladay led the league last year with 9. It'll take him 20.5 years to make up the difference between Moose and Blyleven. That's insane.

Moose also had 7 gold gloves as well as 5 AS games. Blyleven has zero gold gloves and two AS games. Blyleven always had better second halves than first, that's why didn't make many AS games. As for the Gold Gloves, while Moose is an excellent fielder we all know how if you win one you are likely to win a bunch.

Mussina was in the top 6 in CY voting 9 times, Blyleven just t3 times. [n]Okay.[/b]

I am completely shocked that people do not agree with me. Blyleven has 1 thing on Moose, and that's that he played far longer. (In 1400 more innings he has just 17 more wins, and 97 more losses, can it be more obvious?) He played four more seasons. That's it. That would be 350 innings per year. So again, he should be penalized for being an innings eater?

Anyone care to counter these numbers?

Topnotchsy · Jan 14, 2009

Re: HOF discussion continues...Moose vs. Blyleven

Craig - 21hawk said:
Topnotchsy said:

Looks like I'm going to have to argue my case.

W/L
Moose: 270-153
Blyleven 287-250

(For those who are interested the difference is 17-97, a huge difference.)

Moose played for the Orioles when they were good in the 90's and then for the Yankees. Teams Blyleven played for: the Twins of the mid to late seventies, the early eighties Indians, the mid eighties Twins (yes they won the WS in 87, but they only won 85 games that year). You swap the teams each played for and Blyleven has the better W/L.

ERA+ (a number that views ERA compared to league ERA at the time, a very telling stat)
Moose: 123 (ERA .83 better than league average)
Blyleven: 118 (ERA .59 better than league average)

If Moose has a year at 41 like Blyleven did their ERA+ will be almost identical.

Shutouts have been mentioned, and while they do favor Blyleven, that is simply partially a product of the era he played in. So he should be penalized for AVERAGING 20 more IP per season over his career than Moose?

K's have also been mentioned, but no mention is made of the fact that Moose has a higher K/9 than Blyleven. Moose's is 7.11 per 9 innings, Blyleven 6.33 per 9 innings (almost a full K per inning better for his career.) Moose also has a better K/BB ratio than Blyleven. That'll happen when you have 185 more CG in your career. You need to get a few more quick ground ball outs. Think about that number for a second 185. Roy Halladay led the league last year with 9. It'll take him 20.5 years to make up the difference between Moose and Blyleven. That's insane.

Moose also had 7 gold gloves as well as 5 AS games. Blyleven has zero gold gloves and two AS games. Blyleven always had better second halves than first, that's why didn't make many AS games. As for the Gold Gloves, while Moose is an excellent fielder we all know how if you win one you are likely to win a bunch.

Mussina was in the top 6 in CY voting 9 times, Blyleven just 3 times. [n]Okay.[/b]

I am completely shocked that people do not agree with me. Blyleven has 1 thing on Moose, and that's that he played far longer. (In 1400 more innings he has just 17 more wins, and 97 more losses, can it be more obvious?) He played four more seasons. That's it. That would be 350 innings per year. So again, he should be penalized for being an innings eater?

Anyone care to counter these numbers?

Click to expand...

If you are going to reward Blyleven for the extra innings and complete games, you have to hold all the negatives that come with it against him. Blyleven gets credit for the CG's, but the difference in W-L is to big to ignore (and you can blame the teams he played on, but part of it is the fact that compared to his competition, Mussina was the better pitcher (shown in the form ERA+, Cy Young voting and All-Star games.) Not sure how you can dismiss the discrepancy in CY voting with a simple "ok" as it's also tremendously different.

Craig - 21hawk · Jan 14, 2009

Re: HOF discussion continues...Moose vs. Blyleven

Topnotchsy said:
If you are going to reward Blyleven for the extra innings and complete games, you have to hold all the negatives that come with it against him. Blyleven gets credit for the CG's, but the difference in W-L is to big to ignore (and you can blame the teams he played on, but part of it is the fact that compared to his competition, Mussina was the better pitcher (shown in the form ERA+, Cy Young voting and All-Star games.) Not sure how you can dismiss the discrepancy in CY voting with a simple "ok" as it's also tremendously different.

Didn't mean to dismiss it, but I can see that it came across that way. I just don't think that alone is enough to make Moose a better candidate.

I haven't run the numbers, but I'd be willing to bet that the run support Moose has received dwarfs that of Bert, and that is the real difference in the W/L.

Craig

Topnotchsy · Jan 14, 2009

Re: HOF discussion continues...Moose vs. Blyleven

Craig - 21hawk said:
Topnotchsy said:

If you are going to reward Blyleven for the extra innings and complete games, you have to hold all the negatives that come with it against him. Blyleven gets credit for the CG's, but the difference in W-L is to big to ignore (and you can blame the teams he played on, but part of it is the fact that compared to his competition, Mussina was the better pitcher (shown in the form ERA+, Cy Young voting and All-Star games.) Not sure how you can dismiss the discrepancy in CY voting with a simple "ok" as it's also tremendously different.

Click to expand...

Didn't mean to dismiss it, but I can see that it came across that way. I just don't think that alone is enough to make Moose a better candidate.

I haven't run the numbers, but I'd be willing to bet that the run support Moose has received dwarfs that of Bert, and that is the real difference in the W/L.

Craig

Based on the fact their ERA+ are pretty close, and the fact the discrepancy in W-L is so huge, you are probably correct that run support played a role. I do feel that the placing in Cy Young voting is very telling of where Mussina ranked amongst his peers, and where Blyleven did amongst his. Blyleven was a great pitcher and to be fair I never saw him pitch (this may cause me to miss something, or allow me to be unbiased, probably a little of both) but from the numbers across the board I think Mussina was a better pitcher.

sportscardtheory · Jan 14, 2009

People can argue them against each other until they're blue in the face, but it is a pointless argument... and it doesn't make up for the fact that they are both marginal Hall of Famers and the voters have and will vote as such. My personal opinion, Blyleven will eventually get in because of the strikeouts, and Mussina was a far better pitcher, so he will eventually make it in as well... but it might take as long as Blyleven.

Topnotchsy · Jan 14, 2009

sportscardtheory said:
People can argue them against each other until they're blue in the face, but it is a pointless argument... and it doesn't make up for the fact that they are both marginal Hall of Famers and the voters have and will vote as such. My personal opinion, Blyleven will eventually get in because of the strikeouts, and Mussina was a far better pitcher, so he will eventually make it in as well... but it might take as long as Blyleven.

And that's all that matters

Welcome to our community

Be apart of something great, join today!

Poll: HOF discussion continues...Moose vs. Blyleven

Which player is more worthy of HOF consideration

Mike Mussina

Bert Blyleven

Featured Contributor, The best players in history?

New member

Active member

Active member

Active member

Super Moderator

Active member

Active member

New member

Featured Contributor, The best players in history?

Active member

New member

Featured Contributor, The best players in history?

New member

Featured Contributor, The best players in history?

Active member

Featured Contributor, The best players in history?

Similar threads

Log in