Yesterday, I examined the Hall of Fame case for Mike Mussina by comparing him to Tom Glavine. Today, I’m going to further that argument using the CHONE WAR system.
Both players rank in the top 30. Mussina ranks 24th and Glavine ranks 29th. What I did to further compare them was order their top WAR seasons to see how they stacked up. First, let’s get to the raw numbers:
Mussina:
High: 7.4
Low: 0.3
Range: 7.1
Average: 4.20
Glavine:
High: 7.4
Low: -0.2
Range: 7.6
Average: 3.05
So, while they had the exact same high of 7.4, Mussina had a higher low and a higher average. To further this point, I charted the data. The Y-Axis is the WAR and the X-Axis is the “nth” best season.
As you can see, Mussina’s line is consistently higher than Glavine’s. If you’re a Hall of Fame voter and you’re looking at your ballot in the winter of 2009, if you’re going to put Tom Glavine in, you’d damn well better elect Mike Mussina. While he may not have pitched as long–and Glavine should get points for longevity–he put up better numbers (see previous post) but he was also, as this post and the graph and the chart on the CHONE site prove, more valuable than Glavine despite pitching fewer innings, games, and years.
If you enjoyed this article, please consider sharing it!
2 Responses to A Hall Case, Part Two
Leave a Reply
TIQ IQ
The only fly in this ointment is that Mussina surely knew that with the career he had, 300 wins would make him an automatic HOFer. Sitting on 270 and with his rejuvenation his last year, he certainly knew he could make it in two or three years and he chose not to try. I’m betting that will influence some voters and while it may not be the best way, the highly subjective process used to elect guys to the HOF is what we are stuck with. 300 wins is just a flashing red light for induction and pitchers that aspire need to appreciate that. How else to explain Don Sutton or Phil Neikro.
but teh wins!!
first off, I agree with the other Steve S above–I don’t see how sticking around for three more years and going 30-28 with a 5.00 ERA would make him a better HoF candidate than he is now (though it unquestionably would. Such is the idiocy of the process)
another thing to consider: Moose never won a world series ring, but he pitched in the AL East for his entire career. The eventual world champions were in Moose’s division eight times in his career, and the AL champion 11 (including the two AL champions he played for in 2001 and 2003).
Glavine played his whole career in the NL East. The eventual world champions came out of his division just three times (once with him on board) and while the NL champs were from the east ten times in his tenure there, he was on five of those teams.
My point is that Mussina was up against much stiffer competition for most of his career, and Glavine has the edge in wins because well, he was playing for a team that absolutely dominated the NL East for years