I understand your point and certainly feel it's intelligent and well thought out. This is a perfect example of 2 opinions and neither are wrong or stupid (IMO). FTR the difference in your Gooden and Wagner comparison IMO is that Wagner did what the manager and team expected him to do for his entire career, not just 4 seasons. After his first 5 years, Gooden was never a dominant, all star level pitcher again. Wagner had 12 seasons that were all-star level. You can say RP do not belong in the HOF and plenty share that opinion. Some much more knowledgeable than me. But they are in there. 8 have been enshrined, and 6 are exclusively closers. Once closers were put in, it's ridiculous to say Wagner is not HOF worthy in comparison to other closers, even those already in there.
But those "seasons" are not equal. That's disengenuous. Yeah; he did it for 12 seasons - while totaling the same number of innings Gooden totaled in four. For me, that's the entire crux of the issue, and you can't skirt around it by saying, "seasons." Gooden totaled 900 elite innings in four seasons; it took Wagner 12. I'm not sure how you can view one as better than the other? I reject the two wrongs make a right argument. Trevor Hoffman should not be in the Hall of Fame, nor should Rollie Fingers or Bruce Sutter. Mistakes were made, unfortunately - but you don't double-down on the mistakes. Because if the argument is closers are already in, you need to look at Craig Kmibrel and Kenley Jensen's career numbers - both will be top 5 in saves and have better career rate stats than Hoffman. Hader, BTW - with his insane 15 K/9 - could get into the conversation, too. Better to shut this hose off now. But, to be very clear: I think Billy Wagner is one of the best closers to ever do it.
Just wish he could have done it in the post-season. And for me, those saves count more than beating some middle to last place team with a half-empty stadium on a random tuesday night in July. Thus, I consider Pressly to be the best Astros closer... because he did it when it mattered most (and has still not given up a run when it matters most).... until Hader does the same thing!
Batters only have 11% of the at bats on a team at most. And in this era of three true outcomes... a left fielder may get what? One or two opportunities to make a difference making a play in the field. And not all outs are created equal... closers are in games that are typically 'late and close' where there are few opportunities to recover from any mistakes.
The difference is Wagner did his job. 12 different seasons, he was among the best in baseball. Gooden can't say that. Whether one season for him was 4× more than Wagner's is a different argument. To be a HOFer, you need to be among the best in baseball with a balance of outstanding peak and longevity. Wagner had both, Gooden didn't. And to me, every single job in MLB should be eligible for HOF. I understand that some jobs require better numbers than others, but thevidea anyone should be excluded just because of the position they had is sad and unfair to me. For example, Brett Strom will never be in the HOF because he is "just" a pitching coach rather than a manager, but it could be argued that his longevity and impact deserves it. Wagner needed to be top 1% of closers rather than top 3% if he was a SP but he accomplished that.
Wagner's stats back up that he is a sure fire HOF player. Really no debating that. Only thing debating are the voters who are using 1 or 2 votes to vote for their favorite player growing up actually deserve a vote. This is a legacy, and to this day the HOF is already broken with guys like Bonds and Rose not being in, so I don't want to hear it. And Yes, Steroids were used in the Olympics in the 60's/70's. Somehow everyone in that era gets a nose turned away from them. Laughable really.
My question is... what's worse... cocaine use in the 80s or steroid use in the 90s? Both kind of are problematic with the HOF character clause.
The debate isn’t the greatness of Wagner, though. He’s great. The debate is whether there should be a minimum threshold for that greatness wrt the HoF. I definitely think there should be. I think we’ve overinflated the value of closers by pretending games are won/lost in the 9th inning. How good/valuable is Pressly if there’s no Abreu? And why do we value Pressly more? If you had a Cy Young vote, and your choices were a prime season from Justin Verlander or a prime season from Billy Wagner - who gets your vote? It’s actually my primary argument. At no time do we equate SPs and CPs - not in single season awards; not in contracts. We have ample evidence that the baseball establishment doesn’t view them as equal. Why should that suddenly disappear with the HoF? I don’t think closers should be excluded. I’ve said repeatedly Mariano should be in. But the standard has to be incredibly high, given what is a significantly smaller body of work.
What relievers get in after Wagner? Kenley Jansen Aroldis Chapman Craig Kimbrel Those are the 3 primary guys.
I don’t think Chapman has a chance with his off-field issues. But Kimbrel and Jensen should both finish top five in saves with better rate stats than Hoffman. So… unless they choose to close this door, I think both get in. I’m not sure what the argument to keep them out would be?
It's all good My point is that nobody should be excluded from HOF consideration in their rookie season simply because their position. And if 1 closer is worthy it's crazy to think that out of hundreds of them over the course of 55 seasons, there's not another one worthy? Rivera was THAT much better than everyone else? And if there are 2 worthy closers, Wagner should be #2.
Hey Now has some great points. Wagner based on the Hoffman, etc criteria is a sure fire hall of famer. But I’d trade him for somebody like Oswalt in a heartbeat. It’s not even close and Oswalt isn’t sniffing the hall of fame. But Wagner was absolutely elite at what they asked him to do. Tough call. From a completely unbiased perspective they should let Wagner in with his Astros cap then go ahead and shut the door on the whole reliever thing. Problem solved.
I don't see any of those three getting in if Wags is not in... Jansen... 4x All-Star, 2x Reliever of the Year... peak was dominant but short... maybe the Johann Santana of relievers... Wagner in comparison was a 7x all-star... on a solid regular season team which ups his save opportunities. Playoff numbers solid, except for World Series. Chapman -- 7x All-Star... character issues... and I hope Astros fans completely take credit for ruining his playoff resume. He probably only clears the Hall of Fame Monitor in terms of the predictability metrics. Kimbrel -- consistently getting top 10 Cy Young votes earlier in his career, but there may be some recency bias that hurts him. May fall victim to what happened to Andruw Jones... sure fire HOFer until the last 5 years of his career. But if you had me to put them in order... 1. Kimbrel 2. Jansen 3. Chapman
Mariano's case leans heavily on the FAME part of Hall of Fame. I'm not sure any other closer has reached his level of recognition. You literally cannot tell the story of baseball in the 90s and 00s without Rivera. He's a main character; or, at the very least, he has a large supporting role. I'm not sure there's another closer in baseball history that reaches that plateau. They have certainly been part of big moments, of course - but that's different (and usually not favorable to the closer - think Eck v Gibson, or even Lidge v Pujols.) So, yeah - Rivera's the exception. I mean, look - to whatever extent you value WAR... Billy Wagner has 27.8 bWAR. Going back to Gooden, who nobody believes is a Hall of Famer: 48.1. You can dismiss WAR - but it's a cumulative stat that underlines that, while being an elite-level closer, Billy Wagner's overall impact on winning games wasn't large. What he did wasn't easy. There was a glaring spotlight on him many nights. But, also... pitching 1 inning/night, in which you can empty your cartridge, so to speak, in a situation where you inherently have an advantage (rested, team has the lead, etc.)... I just don't think in the entire scope of baseball that merits eternal recognition. I keep asking you questions - here's another: Bryan Abreu has been an elite reliever these past two years. Let's say he continues it for 10 more years. Never a closer, always a set-up man - but he finishes his career 1.84 ERA, 220 ERA+, 2.59 FIP, 13 K/9... is he a Hall of Famer? Because, other than the saves, those numbers are Wagner-esque. To me, I don't think the idea he pitches the 7th or 8th inning should lessen his value. Getting outs in *any* inning is a challenge, and if he's doing it at an elite level, why should we qualify it?
Yeah; I keep using Gooden because those first four years of his career - in which he totaled the same number of innings as Wagner did for his career - were HoF-level elite but he's nowhere near the HoF. But Oswalt is a great mention because no Astros fan would trade Oswalt for Wagner. Ever. Never. Even if your rotation was stacked - you'd never give up an elite SP for an elite RP.
Yes WAR for relievers factors in leverage performance, and he is wayyyyyyy out in front of any modern closers Billy Wagner 28 bWAR, 24 fWAR Trevor Hoffman 28 bWAR, 26 fWAR Mariano Rivera......56 bWAR, 39 fWAR That doesn't even factor in his most impressive feat, his absolutely disgusting playoff numbers. I'll be thrilled to see Wags get in next year, but IMO Rivera is the only full time modern reliever that should be in. (Gossage and Wilhelm were different kind of relievers back in the day, not sure on them)
Now, Rivera being the first unanimous selection is remarkably silly. But it also underscores that he is viewed at a different level than any other closer. And yeah, the postseason numbers are, honestly - they look fake: 0.70 ERA; 0.76 WHIP; 42 saves; 141 IP; 5 rings. In 96 games, he gave up 11 runs, LOL. That's just... bananas. I might argue that had Rivera merely been a good closer (he was elite), those postseason numbers might get him in. They're *that* amazing.
It keeps coming back to whether you consider a HOFer the top 1% of all players in the history of the game or the top 1% of all players at a specific position in the game. My opinion is that it should be both. If you don't consider both, then players at some positions are ineligible before they even play a game and that simply can't tell the story of the game. Any player should achieve a certain level of service time and accomplishment with specific career markers to be considered. Then a player must be considered among the very best players at his position for a period of time. Then if he meets this criteria, he should be voted on. My assertation is that a SP and a RP should not be based on the same criteria. When choosing an All star, they don't exclude all RP because they have 1/3 of IP that starters do. That's all the HOF is, the ultimate All Star team based on entire careers instead of a season. If a player played long enough, did his job very well and better than the others, and is voted in he is a HOFer. The issue here is the voters. They should all vote based on the same criteria and not personal opinions and agendas. The problem is if you remove that why even have a vote. I think RP (and DH) should be every bit as eligible as SP and position players, but with smaller representation and harder to get in. I think we agree on this point, you just feel that "smaller representation" should be smaller than mine. I think RP should be about 1/4 of the SP but my understanding of your opinion is they should be about 1/20 of SP or maybe even more rare.
If their careers ended today, they would be behind Wagner, Hoffman, & Lee in WAR, and slightly behind Sutter (24.5). Joe Nathan is probably the best closer after Wags not in the HOF, and his WAR is 26.4. While all 3 are still going on, they have all slipped from their prime. Character issue does hurt Chapman, but so has his becoming a setup guy the last 2 years. He still throws gas, but is way behind the other 2 in saves and IP. I blame Jose Altuve for his failure. I think 500 saves will become the automatic HOF number, with 400 putting you in a very good position. Sort of like HRs were pre-roids. Smith & Hoffman made it because they were the all-time leaders in saves. Wagner will get in for pure dominance. Sutter was hopefully an exception. I think Kimbrel compares well to Billy, but needs a couple more very good seasons to feel good about his chances.
Think late at night, the other HOF plaques are gonna mock and humiliate the wall that has Beltre, Wagner, Helton, and Mauer on it.
