Will Bret Saberhagen ever make the Hall of Fame?

[sjm76]

I grew up in the 80's and remember Saberhagen being one of the most dominant pitchers of that time with the following accolades yet he still hasn't made the Hall of Fame. Do you think that he'll ever make it and if no, why not?

• 3× All-Star (1987, 1990, 1994)
• World Series champion (1985)
• 2× AL Cy Young Award (1985, 1989)
• World Series MVP (1985)
• Gold Glove Award (1989)
• MLB wins leader (1989)
• AL ERA leader (1989)
• Pitched a no-hitter on August 26, 1991

 

[tramers]

no . I'd have to do lots of research for why not

 

[matfanofold]

I would have to say a solid no, although I agree with everything you said. Just not enough wins, K's, or lingering fame...

 

[UMich92]

I was big fan of Saberhagen and have a stack of 1985 Topps somewhere. Unfortunately, he lost all of his age 32 and most of his age 33 years to injury then finished his career with 2 reasonably good seasons with the Red Sox. Without any other info the following stats for a pitcher would say borderline HOFer: bWAR of 58.9, ERA of 3.34, ERA+ of 126, and WHIP of 1.141. Pre-injury, he was probably on a HOF pace but the career was cut short.

 

[banjar]

Hate to say it, because I like the guy. Met him in 1995 during that one forgettable season with the Rockies and he was pretty cool. At his peak in the late 80's he was as good as they come, but 2/3 of his WAR came in those years and there just wasn't enough production in his other 10 seasons. He fell off the HOF ballot after getting just 1.3% in his first year so I guess the voters must feel the same way. Really similar career and HOF results as David Cone (who was also awesome, but just not good enough).

There's always a chance with the veterans committee but my guess is that's a long shot too since he's not a Yankee

 

[bstanwood]

I will always remember Saberhagen at the end in Boston, he just didn't have a long enough peak to really hit the milestones voters are typically looking for. I really enjoyed him in his Boston years, but I can't see him making it.

 

[Letch77]

There's always a chance with the veterans committee but my guess is that's a long shot too since he's not a Yankee

Bingo...my thoughts exactly!

 

[smapdi]

Pitcher HOF criteria is more amorphous than hitters because the stats are so wonky. They get elected more on career arcs and reaching multiple significant milestones (250 wins plus 3000 Ks) and a perception of greatness. Looking at Saberhagen at the end of his 1989 season, winning his second CYA at just 25, he certainly seemed to have a HOF trajectory. But things happen, baseball is hard, and careers take forever to resolve fully. In between those two awards was 1 solid year and 2 years where he was effective but not great. And then the second half of his career, with major injuries and an apparent degradation of skills was a much different story and taking his career as a whole sadly doesn't measure up.

Using stats like Wins seems like it should count for a lot, until you look at the flip side. You can be a stellar pitcher but if you're on a bad team, you can still have a middling or even losing record. Stuff like all-star games you can immediately throw out. Has zero pertinence in itself, as being selected for the ASG is to be expected for a HOF level player. Same for the lesser awards like Gold Glove. If GGs counted for anything, they would have skipped the waiting period to elect Jim Kaat. MVP of ASG or WS, similarly weightless. Nice things to flesh out a plaque's text, but won't get you one by themselves. Leading a league in a major stat like ERA is great, but only doing so once doesn't go very far. Modern SABRmetrics like WAR and advanced derivative stats like BAA and ERA+ are more useful, but no one is getting elected just because of a fancy number under an acronym few people understand. The most important thing is perception. Were they the best pitcher in the league at any point? Even CYA winners might not be, as those selections are prone to being more purely gaudy-stat driven. Get 22 wins on a playoff team and you're going to be in the conversation at the end of the year, no matter if you have a 4.95 ERA and walk almost as many as you strike out. And things like no-hitters are great, but a single game isn't going to get you there. Again, they are more a symptom of greatness than a strict demonstration of it.

Guys like Saberhagen, David Cone, Dave Stieb, or Jack Morris, 80s workhorses who really had some fine seasons, just didn't put together careers that looked really dominant when you take the whole thing in. Morris did finally get in but it took forever, he was chosen by the VC and not the writers. The John/Mussina/Blyleven/Kaat logjam had to get cleared up first, and his ERA was continually cited as an automatic disqualification. I don't recall Saberhagen being really dominant, though I was paying a lot less attention to baseball in the late 80s. Two CYAs is great, and being separated by a few years counts for a lot as it wasn't just a Lincecum-like peak but evidence for continued excellence. However, Saberhagen, and Cone to a lesser extent, suffered from a "great every other year" syndrome, and that's going to stand out brightly when scrolling down a stat sheet. So no, no HOF for Sabes.

 

[theplasticman]

good breakdown