Should I keep Arturo Delgado in the HOF?

[Tyler87898]

The AI put him in the HOF except I'm not sure if he should be. Thoughts?



If you can't see the image, it is here http://imgur.com/AcD1t

EDIT: Can someone teach me how to insert a picture directly to the post so it shows?

[Isryion]

It may depend on how he compares to the rest of your league, but (and I'm usually lenient in this area) he looks like a good pitcher but not great, and, in most leagues, a ways from HoF material.

[The Game]

For me personally 3400 K is an automatic induction qualifier.
Delgado is slightly better then Curt Schilling who if I had a vote I would put into the HOF (ya hear that Gerhig38 ) simply because Schill has over 3100 K.
Curt Schilling Statistics and History - Baseball-Reference.com

[timmermac]

I'd like to see awards, championships won, that sort of thing before I make a decision. Right now, he's borderline.

[dawg_gone]

Career WHIP better than Greg Maddux? But only 15 years compared to Maddux's 24. And year 15 was a complete dropoff. I'm on the fence too. Dem strikeouts doe.

[SandMan]

I'd say keep him in. OOTP minimum for HOF selection is 200+ wins with and ERA under 4.00. He met the minimum standards. He looks like he was still a good pitcher so I would say he should remain in the HOF.

[Cryomaniac]

I'd vote to keep him in. He played a year too long imho, but that shouldn't go against someone unless it completely ruins their rate stats.

[Tyler87898]

Originally Posted by timmermac

I'd like to see awards, championships won, that sort of thing before I make a decision. Right now, he's borderline.

His awards:

8 Pitcher of the month awards
2 Cy Young Awards
4 All-star selections

He won no world championships in his career.

[redwa]

I would keep him in. If you look at his prime years between 22 and 32 he must have been one of the dominating pitchers in your league. That is an excellent winning percentage and all his other stats are really good. It just looks like he didn't pad his stats by sticking around past his prime.

[hfield007]

Sure maybe he gave up some Homers in his day but those K and BB numbers are very impressive.

Not to mention during some of his prime years it looks like he had a lower tier defense or just bad luck with +.314 BABIP 4 years in a row while still posting some of his best defensive independent numbers.

I'd say keep him. He played 15 seasons and those middle 11 look like he was consistently one of the best pitchers in the game.

Catfish Hunter, Juan Marichal, Don Drysdale, Jim Bunning and Bob Feller all have similar or worse real life defensive independent numbers not to mention worse ERA+

They are all in the real HoF

[Cork55]

He's close, but I would not put him in the HoF.

[joefromchicago]

Originally Posted by Tyler87898

The AI put him in the HOF except I'm not sure if he should be. Thoughts?

Delgado is, in effect, Juan Marichal. Delgado has 227 wins and a .625 winning percentage over fifteen seasons. Marichal had 243 wins and a .631 winning percentage over sixteen seasons. Both were strikeout pitchers with very good K/BB ratios -- Delgado 4.01, Marichal 3.25. Delgado's ERA+ is 122, Marichal's is 123. Delgado won two CYAs, whereas Marichal didn't win any, but I'm assuming that Delgado didn't pitch in the same league as a Koufax or Gibson (and didn't hit a Johnny Roseboro over the head with a bat).

This might be blasphemy, but I don't put a lot of weight on strikeout totals for pitchers. If a pitcher strikes out 27 batters and wins the game or if he throws 27 groundouts and wins the game, it still adds up to one win for the team, and wins are the most important thing in baseball. I haven't seen any evidence that strikeouts are somehow better outs than any other kind of out. 3401 strikeouts in a career is an impressive total (that would put him ninth in MLB history between Walter Johnson and Greg Maddux), but I put more weight on things like WHIP and OAVG.

Bottom line: Marichal wasn't a first-ballot hall of famer, but he deserved to be inducted. I'd say the same about Delgado.

Originally Posted by Tyler87898

EDIT: Can someone teach me how to insert a picture directly to the post so it shows?

Create a file of the image that you want in a graphics program. Save it as a .jpg or .png file. In the "reply" box, click the paper clip icon at the top. Go to the top and click "browse" to upload the file from your computer and then click "upload."

[Tyler87898]

Create a file of the image that you want in a graphics program. Save it as a .jpg or .png file. In the "reply" box, click the paper clip icon at the top. Go to the top and click "browse" to upload the file from your computer and then click "upload."

I am going to try it out, thanks!

[Isryion]

Originally Posted by joefromchicago

I haven't seen any evidence that strikeouts are somehow better outs than any other kind of out.

"

There is actually evidence that a strikeout is the best result a pitcher can get from a hitter and the worst result for a hitter, and if you think about it it makes sense. Runs are more likely to score on a ball put in play (not unusual at all) than on a strikeout (very, very rarely). A strikeout also greatly decreases the chance that the next hitter(s) can have a run-producing at bat.

Conversely, there's also evidence that pitcher win total is not as much a factor of the pitcher as we like to think.

Just food for thought...

[legofarley]

I'd say yes, He's a Famer.

[rogmax11]

Im of the opinion that high K totals indicate a greater degree of dominance or skill, or both, provided that excess wildness isnt a mitigating factor. To sustain the level of high quality production that Delgado achieved over 11 of his seasons is remarkable at the very least. If he did so in an environment like present-day Philadelphia, in a league with comparable modern day offensive production only cements my approval of his HOF credentials. And I concur: Schilling deserves inclusion as well!

[hfield007]

From the books I have read when a ball is hit into play what happens is 44% randomness and luck. That is almost half. A pitcher playing with a great defense has his fielding dependent pitching stats greatly influenced by things that are completely out of his control.

A strikeout is far superior to fielding dependent outs.

[fhomess]

Originally Posted by Isryion

Conversely, there's also evidence that pitcher win total is not as much a factor of the pitcher as we like to think.

Just food for thought...

There's also evidence that over the course of a career, pitcher wins are a pretty good indicator of how good a pitcher was.

Anyway, it's really imossible to say whether or not a player belongs in the HOF based on his stats alone. You need to understand context. What were other players in the league doing during the same time? ERA+ gives you a glimpse of that, and 122 is decent but not great. There aren't a ton of MLB HOFers with ERA+ lower than that, and the ones that are are either borderline or have some reason to get in that ERA+ doesn't tell the full story on (e.g. Nolan Ryan - 112).

You also need to decide what YOU want your HOF to be. If you want lots of players in, then keep him. If you want it to be exclusive, take him out. You can always put him back in later.

[D-BacksJosh]

He's got 3401 strikeouts in 14 seasons, keep him in.

[bwburke94]

Originally Posted by D-BacksJosh

He's got 3401 strikeouts in 14 seasons, keep him in.

I'll call it fourteen and a half. 16 wins and 235 strikeouts per year in the 5-man rotation era - with no relief appearances - barely makes it into the HOF. Strikeouts are one of the best indicators of a pitcher's quality.