Is it possible to win 300 games and not be HOF-worthy?

[ThatSeventiesGuy]

Because Frank Tanana seems about ready to give it a go...

[goalieump413]

No, it's not. Not these days. Maybe back then, but probably not back then. A milestone like that deserves inclusion in the Hall.

[jpeters1734]

I would vote for him on durability alone

[JohnHoward]

Why, yes. Yes it is possible.

[Matt Arnold]

If I look at those numbers, if he retired after about the 88 season, I don't think anyone would have a problem with him making it in. 237-213 (if I have my numbers right), about 77 WAR for his career. Those are solid numbers. In the MLB, maybe not first ballot numbers, but someone who would likely make it in eventually.

So the fact that he hung on, essentially as a replacement calibre player, does suck, but should that be held against him? He's obviously racked up some good counting numbers, which hurts his career ERA. And of course, with the stats he's put up those last couple years, I wouldn't be certain he could even make it to 300 wins if he held on one more year.

[jpeters1734]

Originally Posted by UWHabs

If I look at those numbers, if he retired after about the 88 season, I don't think anyone would have a problem with him making it in. 237-213 (if I have my numbers right), about 77 WAR for his career. Those are solid numbers. In the MLB, maybe not first ballot numbers, but someone who would likely make it in eventually.

So the fact that he hung on, essentially as a replacement calibre player, does suck, but should that be held against him? He's obviously racked up some good counting numbers, which hurts his career ERA. And of course, with the stats he's put up those last couple years, I wouldn't be certain he could even make it to 300 wins if he held on one more year.

imo he didn't seem to be doing that well before '88. I'm curious how he stacks up against his peers. How many times was he on the top 5 list for, era/whip/k's/war? How many all-stars?

[Assos]

In real life, Frank had an interesting career. He went from a hard throw to a soft tosser because of an arm injury. The Angels had a two headed monster in Ryan and Tanana in the 70s. In theory, if he never blew out his arm, he could maybe been in the same breathe as Ryan or Carlton or Seaver.

[canadian content]

Originally Posted by Assos

In real life, Frank had an interesting career. He went from a hard throw to a soft tosser because of an arm injury. The Angels had a two headed monster in Ryan and Tanana in the 70s. In theory, if he never blew out his arm, he could maybe been in the same breathe as Ryan or Carlton or Seaver.

It was, "Tanana and Ryan and two days of cryin"!

[Ike348]

It comes down to ability or longevity. Somebody like Koufax is in the HOF for his ability, not his longevity. I would say no. His ERA+ of 103 says he was really mediocre for a really long time.

[Déjà Bru]

Originally Posted by Ike348

It comes down to ability or longevity. Somebody like Koufax is in the HOF for his ability, not his longevity. I would say no. His ERA+ of 103 says he was really mediocre for a really long time.

This is how I feel. Maybe it's not a great example (from the Dead Ball / 4-man Rotation Era) but I think this fellow does not go to the Hall just because he won 271 games out of 540 decisions! That just means he pitched a lot of games in his career like a lot of other guys in those times. Yes, he was durable but is that HOF-worthy by itself? And before you love his 2.75 ERA, remember this is Dead Ball, lots of errors, lots of unearned runs. The game wanted to admit this guy (200 wins, less than 4.00 ERA) but I put on my Kennesaw Mountain Landis hat and kicked him out!

EDIT: The game gave him his first and last name. The nickname was my idea.

[BaseballMan]

Going by wins im not sure he should make it even at 300 wins. Yes he did his job with longevity but many workers work a job for 30 years and do nothing more than there job.
I could see in a teams hof but hes so close to a losing record i would have a hard time putting him in. It does seem like a weird case. Usually a 300 winner is good enough to win at least 50 more than he loss. Havent checked but i was thinking that the majority dont have losses that close to wins. Maybe at the 200 win mark its closer but im not sure.

[OakDragon]

I would say no, a 4+ ERA does not deserve to get in, 300 wins or not (even if he did seem to have little run support, judging by winning percentages).

Likewise, I would say the same thing about Cal Ripken Jr. and 3,000 hits. While he was great defensively, I think he was merely a good hitter. Longevity otherwise inflated his stats. Obviously, I'm in the minority on that one, though.

[scott1964]

I have a few of my guys in my dynasty league that did not get because they lost more than they won.

[scott1964]

Originally Posted by Déjà Bru

This is how I feel. Maybe it's not a great example (from the Dead Ball / 4-man Rotation Era) but I think this fellow does not go to the Hall just because he won 271 games out of 540 decisions! That just means he pitched a lot of games in his career like a lot of other guys in those times. Yes, he was durable but is that HOF-worthy by itself? And before you love his 2.75 ERA, remember this is Dead Ball, lots of errors, lots of unearned runs. The game wanted to admit this guy (200 wins, less than 4.00 ERA) but I put on my Kennesaw Mountain Landis hat and kicked him out!

EDIT: The game gave him his first and last name. The nickname was my idea.

Interesting, My Iburg did not do anything worth while

[JMDurron]

The Tanana example seems to drive home the idea that those of us who play with low or very low injury settings might need to raise the automatic HOF induction thresholds that relate to counting stats.

[baseballonly]

Not with an ERA above 4. Wins mean nothing IMO.

[HolyCow98]

Damn he gave up a lot of homers.

For me...I can't vote someone in unless they appear to be consistently one of the best during their playing times. In your Tanana's case, not knowing what your league looks like, he seemed to have 4-5 good seasons, a few slightly decent seasons, and then 10+ seasons where he may have been struggling to maintain just being league average. Not HOF material for me more like Hall of Durable.

[wuttang]

Like it or not, if a pitcher gets to 300 wins in the modern era, he's automatically in the HOF. But that 4+ era....ugh.

Imo, the HOF needs to have more specific criterion.
We also come back to the peak vs longevity debate.

If you could have a career, or better yet, you're a GM and looking to draft a pitcher and you have an all knowing crystal ball, who do u sign?
Koufax or Mussina?
Let's say you get to sign them for life, with same total contract dollars.
Koufax had the peak but offered your team about 53 total career WAR.
Mussina had the lesser peak, but offers about 83 total career WAR.

Not the best solution but JAWS had some good ideas.
Also a descent post about the subject

http://m.espn.go.com/general/blogs/b...72&src=desktop

[Déjà Bru]

Originally Posted by scott1964

Interesting, My Iburg did not do anything worth while

The funny thing is, he was NOT supposed to be in my league! I have an historical MLB setup but with fictional players. However, I inadvertently checked the Import Historical Rookies box for a season or two and some real guys snuck in. There was Iburg, Peaches Graham, and Heinie Wagner among others. Well, I squelched the reality pipeline but left those guys alone. Heh, I'm glad I did . . . I retired Wagner's uniform number recently.

[baseballonly]

Could we see his VORP numbers?