Big League Stew - MLB

Somebody must get Mike Mussina to reconsider this whole retiring business.

Not that Mussina will change his mind. He doesn't seem like the Brett Favre-type to do so. No, not at all the kind to wait until mid-season, have a mini-auction for his services before announcing triumphantly from George's Box that he's "back!"

That's not Mussina's style. When he says, "I'm done," he probably means it. Too bad, because baseball needs more guys like Mussina. He's a smart cookie with a quirky personality who seems to make for a solid teammate and those are fine reasons to have him around. So is his unfulfilled personal quest to be on a World Series winner.

But there's another reason he should stay.

Baseball needs durable, consistent, good and sometimes-great pitchers. We whine about it all of the time, how things ain't how they used to be with pitchers, how there never will be another 300-game winner (except for Randy Johnson ... well, maybe, hopefully) because pitchers just don't do that anymore.

The game needs a few good men. And Mussina needs the game, if just for a little longer.

Mussina is, as any reasonable statistical analysis would show, a Hall of Fame pitcher. I'm just not sure the rest of the world — specifically the Hall electorate, which isn't always easily swayed or reasonable — is convinced.

He doesn't have 300 wins or 3,000 strikeouts and he's never won a Cy Young Award. Those facts alone will prevent many of the writers from casting a vote for Mussina, who has 270 victories, 2,813 strikeouts and one second-place finish in the Cy. He also only has one 20-win season — the just completed 2008 — to his name. 

And now, he's retiring, within whispering range of those arbirtary and artificial but undeniably important milestones. 

Which is why voters will likely look at Moose and say "Good, but not great."

True, Mussina wasn't as great as Greg Maddux or Roger Clemens at their greatest, but there is something great to be said for being consistently good for a long time. Nine times he's finished in the top six in Cy Young voting. Five times he was an All-Star. Seven times he won a Gold Glove.

Mussina's not going to hang around just so some stubborn writer becomes convinced he's a Hall of Famer. If he wasn't a Hall of Famer before, don't vote for him because of something he did at age 40 or 41, he'd probably say.

But Mussina wouldn't just be hanging around.

Mussina still can pitch. Many thought his career was toast during the 2007 season, when his ERA screamed to a career-worst 5.15, and his strikeout rate dropped a disturbing amount (if you are disturbed by stikeout rates, which some of us ARE). His 2008 season was pretty close to run-of-the-mill for Mussina.

The good news is that he leaves on a high note, finishing with 20 victories for the first time, and with the last of his Gold Gloves.

The bad news is that I'm just not sure it was high enough to get into the Hall, a spot where he definitely belongs.

digg delicious
more

124 Comments

Post a Comment
  1. The Thrilla in Vanilla
    1. Posted by The Thrilla in Vanilla Thu Sep 03, 2009 11:01 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    "He doesn't have 300 wins, 3,000 strikeouts and he's never won a Cy Young Award."
    While I'll grant that the 300 wins is an artificial statistic (although the argument should be made that it may be less so for a pitcher who pitched for the Yankees in the late 90's/early 2000's), the strikeouts and Cy Young award most certainly are not.
    Especially for a pitcher with such a lauded and consistent career as you trumpet, the fact that he fell short of all three measures is glaring. A pitcher with such a long career, parts of which were spent on such great Yankees squads, should have at least pulled out one of the three landmarks.
    Moose was good. He's a first ballot Hall of Great Careers. But you are indeed in the minority if you think he's a no-brainer for the Hall of Fame.
  2. Saro G
    2. Posted by Saro G Thu Sep 03, 2009 2:46 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    Totally agree, Thrilla.
  3. Ben L
    3. Posted by Ben L Thu Sep 03, 2009 10:44 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    See this is a problem with the Hall of Fame. It was initially created for the best of the best. Now it's become the classic argument to say "well he was good so he should be in." Here's a simple question I tend to pose: Can you honestly tell me over any span of say 3 years or more during Moose's career was he considered one of the top 5 pitchers in baseball. No. Moose was a great pitcher... but not a legendary hall of famer.
  4. vincent g
    4. Posted by vincent g Thu Sep 03, 2009 10:36 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    Take into consideration the years that moose pitched in the steroid /dh laden al east when his fast ball was topping out at 93 94 . now consider the only year he wins the 20 is considered to be the cleanest year in baseball in a long while. in my eyes moose could have very well won 20 numerous times in those years when hitters were juiced up.. i feel he deserves great consideration for the hall.. class act through
  5. vincent g
    5. Posted by vincent g Thu Sep 03, 2009 10:36 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    Take into consideration the years that moose pitched in the steroid /dh laden al east when his fast ball was topping out at 93 94 . now consider the only year he wins the 20 is considered to be the cleanest year in baseball in a long while. in my eyes moose could have very well won 20 numerous times in those years when hitters were juiced up.. i feel he deserves great consideration for the hall.. class act through and through
  6. yogaflame
    6. Posted by yogaflame Thu Sep 03, 2009 3:23 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    if there was a hall of "consistently very good" I'd vote Mussina in. I think if he cared about the HOF then he'd play for a few more years. If nothing other than to add stats and to make it tilt more in his favor because he's pretty dang close, but I'd still vote no.
  7. mustangmexx
    7. Posted by mustangmexx Thu Sep 03, 2009 7:30 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    I agree alot with ben and thrilla but he would be the first pitcher to finish his career 100 games over.500. and not make the hall. Moose has had longevity through out the steroid era is less then 30 games short of 300 he desereves to get into the hall of fame.
  8. Jack
    8. Posted by Jack Thu Sep 03, 2009 4:26 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    It's very simple. This game isn't about Cy Youngs or 3000 Strikeouts. It's about finding ways to win ball games.
    Mussina is tied for 33rd in wins, there are 38 pitchers who have won 270 or more games.
    Out of those 38 players only FIVE pitchers have a better win percentage: Lefty Grove, Christy Mathewson, Grover Cleveland Alexander, Roger Clemens and Randy Johnson.
    So when it comes down to it - winning ball games - only FIVE pitchers in the HISTORY of baseball have done it at a better clip than Mussina when their career is said and done(Well, not done yet for Johnson but close).
  9. Jack
    9. Posted by Jack Thu Sep 03, 2009 4:26 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    "If nothing other than to add stats and to make it tilt more in his favor because he's pretty dang close"
    I never get the above(This isn't aimed at you, Yogaflame, but at the idea of this). So if Mussina plays a few more seasons, does poorly but goes around 11-14 in all of them with an ERA over 4, he should then get in because he hit the "magic" number of 300? If anyone will vote him in because of three poor seasons like that, then they do not deserve a vote.
  10. Peter D
    10. Posted by Peter D Thu Sep 03, 2009 8:22 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    Bert Blyleven belongs before Mussina.
    Blyleven had 60 shutouts.......60
    and his strikeout total is other worldy.
    But he gets no love since he bounced around for 20 years
  11. Y@nkee F@n
    11. Posted by Y@nkee F@n Thu Sep 03, 2009 4:41 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    Moose was great. He pitched during the era of steroid use. He has to get credit for that. He deserves to be in the HOF. I am still sorry to hear that he has retired. He is the perfect role model in MLB. I’ve had the honor to be close to Mike on several occasions and he sure is a classy guy!
  12. MOG
    12. Posted by MOG Thu Sep 03, 2009 4:11 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    HOF equates to cream of the crop and while Mussina was a very good pitcher, when compared to all of the pitchers in the history of the league, he is just not in the 'cream of the crop' category. 18 years with 9 of those showing an ERA over 3.50; 6 of 18 over 4.00. It used to be that the great pitchers never had ERAs over 3.50 but we see a ton over 4.00 all the time and everyone thinks these guys are awesome for whatever reason. You want to see HOF numbers, look at someone like Bob Gibson who's CAREER ERA was 2.91 with 255 CGs in 17 seasons (Mussina had 57). Gibson didn't win as many games (Mussina 270; Gibson 251) but Gibson scared the crap out of anyone who stood in the box and did not make any teams look forward to face him. I don't think the same can be said of Mussina. Nonetheless, Mussina had a good career, just not HOF caliber.
  13. Jack
    13. Posted by Jack Thu Sep 03, 2009 4:26 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    GDawg: When Mussina is compared to all of the pitchers in the history of the league who have won 270+ games(38 pitchers), he compares VERY favorably. Only FIVE pitchers have a better win percentage.
    You can not compare numbers like ERA and CGs, these are completely different eras. Bob Gibson played when bullpens were completely different beasts.
    Also remember, Mussina played during an era were many hitters(and apparently pitchers too)were on steroids and offense exploded - so ERAs all around were higher.
    As for Mussina and ERA, compared to other players who played during his era, in 11 of his 18 years he finished in the top ten in ERA for the AL.
    Bob Gibson, had an ERA in the top ten in 8 times of his 17 seasons.
  14. jenn
    14. Posted by jenn Thu Sep 03, 2009 4:32 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    Sad news to see him retire, but just like Moose to go out on top. I grew up in Baltimore, I have his rookie card and I cried when he became a Yankee. Thanks for the memories of a great career from a classy guy!
  15. bigboo's bro
    15. Posted by bigboo's bro Thu Sep 03, 2009 3:38 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    Its would be a real shame if Mussina didn't go straight into the Hall. It would also be interesting to hear a candid interview with Mussina about why he is walking away. He has the stuff to get 300 wins and 3000 Ks. Is it disillusionment with the Yankee team he finds himself on? Is it recognition that this team will not win a World Series over the next few years? Is it because he was disappointed by the rabid criticism he got last year when he didn't have a great season, and now he has proven his critics wrong? It may just be that he is tired of the daily struggle and he doesn't enjoy it anymore, but that didn't seem true last season. In any case, it would be interesting to get the real scoop.
  16. Breeze Bruin
    16. Posted by Breeze Bruin Thu Sep 03, 2009 4:53 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    Blyleven does not belong in the hall of fame before Mussina, if at all. He won 17 more games than Mussina while losing 97 more. His career ERA of 3.31 is better than Mussina's 3.68 but when you compare League ERAs (3.90 for BB, 4.51 for MM) Mussina again comes out ahead. (BB-.59, MM-.83) Also, Blyleven only averaged 4 more strikeouts per year. I've never been a big fan of Mussinas but his win percentage alone might make him Hall material
  17. MOG
    17. Posted by MOG Thu Sep 03, 2009 4:11 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    Jack, I'll admit after having submitted my take that I didn't take into account the era that each player pitches/hits in and your arguements about how the bullpens and steroids factor in are legitimate ones. When I think of great pitchers of this latest era though, I just don't think of Mussina in the same breath as say someone like Maddox or Glavine for example. To me the HOF should be a very select group and I have to admit that there are some players in it that really shouldn't be in based on that statement. Believe me, I agree that Mussina was a very, very good pitcher but in terms of what I feel the HOF standard SHOULD be, he would not make.
  18. FISCH
    18. Posted by FISCH Thu Sep 03, 2009 8:45 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    If don sutton made it to the hall then moose belongs also. why keep borderline players out? the more the merrier.
  19. nikky1_2_3
    19. Posted by nikky1_2_3 Thu Sep 03, 2009 7:38 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    def, Hall of Famer for me. Go MOOSE... love his pitching style.
  20. Juan V
    20. Posted by Juan V Thu Sep 03, 2009 3:40 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    15, pete abe posted moose's conference call (where he announced his retirement).
    from what i heard (the first 15 minutes), he had looked at the last 4 years of his career during the offseason (2004-2007), and saw that one year had been tip top (06), two ok, but nothing great (2004-2005) and one horrible (2007).
    moose then said that he really did not want to risk pitching on and on if he was going to be run-of-the-mill at best.
    he also mentioned that once he hit 250 at the end of 2007, 300 became an issue, but it had taken him 4 years to go from 200 to 250.
    personally, i think that the possibility of 300 became this huge crutch for moose, and he just didn't want to be overwhelmed by it....
  21. SSSS
    21. Posted by SSSS Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:43 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    When comparing other pitchers to Mussina, you must take into account that he spent his entire career in the AL. The constant DHs Mussina faced in his career make his numbers even more impressive. I'm not saying this makes Mussina better then Clemens (who also spent most of his career in the AL), Maddox, or Randy Johnson, but I think he ranks within the top 5 pitchers of that generation in terms of consistency, wins, strikeouts. (Clemens, Maddox, Johnson, Mussina, Glavine). Only two of these top 5 pitched the majority of their career in the AL (Clemens and Mussina).
  22. FISCH
    22. Posted by FISCH Thu Sep 03, 2009 8:45 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    A.l. or n.l. you still have to pitch but he still belongs.
  23. T G
    23. Posted by T G Thu Sep 03, 2009 4:02 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    I don't think you can take his win percentage into account. Wins, and win percentage to me, are not so much based on the pitcher, but more the quality of the team they are on. For sure a good consistent pitcher, but not an ELITE pitcher.
  24. El
    24. Posted by El Thu Sep 03, 2009 3:57 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    no championships, no cy young, no no-hitters, won 20 games because his team can score 5+ runs for him any giving night, so I won't consider him being in the Hall of Fame.
  25. Tim
    25. Posted by Tim Thu Sep 03, 2009 7:30 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    the thing about mussina was, he won a lot of games, but didn't do it with flair or style. you didn't get amped up watching him pitch, he just did his job, and did it very well for a very long time.
    as for the numbers, 300 wins is arbitrary. 3000 strike outs is arbitrary (you don't need a ton of strikeouts to be a good pitcher), the only one that isn't arbitrary is the cy young award, and it's because of what i said above that he never won one. he pitched very good, for a very long time, but he never made a lot of noise doing it, so he was often overlooked.
    hall of fame material??? that remains to be seen. i for one would be happy to see it, but wouldn't be surprised if it didn't.

Big League Stew

Add to My Yahoo! RSS

'Duk

Big League Stew is an MLB blog edited by Kevin Kaduk. Email him, and follow him on Twitter.

Teams

Customize to follow news and rumors on your favorite teams. [ Sign in ]

Related Photo Gallery

Y! Sports Blogs

Big League Stew Recent Readers