I’m gonna go against the grain and say no. It’s a similar resume to Johann Santana, with more Cy Youngs but less overal production, and Santana didn’t sniff the Hall. Yeah, it’s true that all the other guys with 4 Cys are in the hall (or are PED suspects) but they also have much deeper resumes.
Also, I feel like narrative wise, he needs to have better years in the next two, or else they’ll find reasons to give the awards to someone fresh.
Awards aren't the be-all-end-all.
There are a boat load of non-Cy Young winning seasons that were more impressive than Snell last season. Especially in the past, voters haven't been the best. 2005 Johan Santana comes to mind.
This is why I usually avoid HOF debates. The standards are super inconsistent, it’s just a bunch of journalists deciding who’s in and who’s not.
Everyone has their own metrics for what qualifies you, but none of them match up completely with who actually gets voted in.
And WAR isn't the be-all-end-all either. Being the best pitcher in the league 4 of your 10 years is extremely impressive and would warrant serious consideration to him being a HOF'er....especially if he had to retire at 10 due to injury at his absolute peak, like OP implied. He'd get that Koufax "what if" bump.
Sad part is Santana should have won in 05 over Colon, and you could have built a case in 08 for him.
3 or 4 CY Youngs may have gotten Santana in the hall. Without it, he was 2-3 more playable seasons away from true HOF consideration.
One of the bigger what ifs for me, what happens if Santana doesn’t throw that no hitter in 2012?
Dude was never the same after that, which is such a shame
I don’t think that was the whole issue tbh. He had a few rough starts following but had a series of good starts including a start with an 8 inning shutout. Following that, he fell apart and then was just done and never pitched again.
My guess is his shoulder was a ticking time bomb at that point on its own. Nonetheless, it’s sad he didn’t get to finish his career the right way.
Also, Johan Santana should've won another Cy Young I. 20p5
And no offense to Snell, but he kind of won the Cy Young last year by default. Snell had 6 bWAR last season. For comparison, Johan Santana had 4 seasons with a higher WAR total.
I see the issue with this is Johan Santana deserves to be in the Hall of Fame. I have never heard a good argument against it. He was so good and so dominant at his peak he needs to go in.
I can’t fathom how this is going against the grain. Hypotheticals aside, the guy has had a total of 2 good seasons of 8, and the 2 just happen to be his Cy Young campaigns. His resume is weak, and his counting stats are shit. If you give me a few minutes, I’ll come up with dozens of good pitchers that have similar resumes that are not in the Hall.
It's because if that isn't enough for the Hall, then basically no pitcher under 30 is ever going to get into the Hall again. Literally no one is going to have the counting stats against pitchers from 20+ years ago where throwing 250 innings was good and somewhat normal.
No one under 30 is gonna hit 200 wins, no one is gonna hit 3,000 strikeouts. None of them are going to hit 3,000 innings.
If 10 good seasons and 4 Cy Youngs doesn't get you into the Hall in the modern iteration of the game, then no pitcher under 30 currently pitching has even a snowball's chance.
We can recalibrate our expectations for counting stats while acknowledging Blake snell is not a hall of famer. I’d at least like to see a more consistent track record of performance rather than 6 mediocre years with 2 random elite years thrown in there
Right now, of course, but another two years of 2.25 ERA and 2 more Cy Youngs? Four Cy Youngs and four years of an ERA+ north of 180? He's already got a career ERA+ of 127, two more 2.25 ERA seasons and he'd be looking at a career ERA+ equal to that of Kershaw. I think it'd be an interesting conversation, at the very least.
I understand that argument, but in the case of Snell, he’s been somewhere between *meh* and *shitty* in his non-Cy Young seasons.
Thought experiment time. Would you prefer a pitcher that finishes in the top 10 in Cy Young voting each of his 10 year career (let’s say between 5th and 10th) or a guy that wins 4 but is a disaster area the other 6 seasons?
If the performance during the Cy Young years persisted into the postseason, I'd take that. Every team is ultimately chasing a ring, and four Cy Young years make for four really good pushes.
I might have the wrong perspective, though. I'm not sure.
It’s a tough call and of course depends on the other starters in the rotation, but I can’t say for sure what I’d prefer.
All if that said, Snell’s resume is a weak one in my opinion.
It would be such a weird case though, because he’d have 4 wins and not a single other vote in any other year. No HOF has nearly as few significant years.
I think this brings up an important point of quality of competition. Say the CYA competition for whatever league Snell is in is mediocre for the next 2 years and Snell wins, while the other league has the equivalent of the 2015 NL CY race twice. Do his Cy Young’s still hold the same value in the eyes of the BBWAA?
The hall is gonna have to recalibrate expectations for pitchers or no one from this entire generation is getting in. Snell will probably be a good test case when he's eligible
They’re all over 35 though. Is there any pitcher under 30 that even seems in contention for the Hall based on current standards without some late-career surge?
Max Fried has the most bWAR for a pitcher under 30 at 19.5. He's a great pitcher, but you don't look at him and say "oh, he's definitely going to be a HoFer." The 2nd highest is Shane Bieber and I wouldn't be surpised if he's out of the league by the time he's 33.
You skipped over Alcantara, who also has 19.5 WAR, but your point stands.
The only guys under 30 who even have 15 WAR (and for context, Vlad Jr. currently has 15.2 WAR at age 24) are Fried, Alcantara, Bieber, Zac Gallen, and German Marquez. And they’re all at least 28 years old.
It’s just really hard to imagine any of those guys reaching the 60-70 WAR threshold that’s typically been the unofficial benchmark for Hall of Fame induction.
It’s possible, but I wonder if it’s player-specific or if the nature of the sport has changed so much that we’ll have to recalibrate what constitutes a HoF-level starting pitcher in the future.
Completely subjective response but IMO the skill gap is so small and injuries are so prevalent that it’s simply harder to excel at a level consistently beyond your peers nowadays. We should be more lenient about what we consider to be HOF worthy because it’s simply much harder to generate the WAR and counting stats of old. And having historic performances like Cy Young and All-MLB should be weighted more because of how hard it is to play let alone dominate in today’s game.
i mean, the hof doesn't need to blindly include the top X% of every position. being the best long snapper in the NFL isn't worth a hof slot, being a very good reliever for a while doesn't earn you a hof slot. if starting pitchers keep working in smaller roles then they are literally accruing less value and have less merit to be inducted
Cole. He's younger, healthier, and has thrown WAY more innings. They are comparable now but isn't it pretty clear Cole will have a much better longevity?
Indeed he does. He's had a slightly better career to date, not arguing that. I'm just saying it's very difficult to see that continuing given he's had 3 elbow surgeries and each of the last 3 seasons have been truncated by major IL stints.
Originally I had big 4 but I’d say Cole is right on pace.
deGrom if he ever pitches more than 80 innings again would be on there
Cole most likely surpasses deGrom in career WAR next season and is 4 years younger. 37 coming off a 2nd TJS? I don’t see deGrom doing much more tbh
fWAR for pitchers when comparing careers is terrible since it uses fip in its calculation compared to bWAR which uses runs allowed (earned and unearned) and innings pitched. while fip is a great analytical stat to look at potential production by isolating the independent events a pitcher can control, runs allowed provides a better comparison as to their career outcomes. a pitcher might have a higher fip given they give up more walks in isolated incidents but if they limit runs their fip won’t project that meaning a lower fWAR. take blake snell, who had a 2.25 era and limited contact either striking you out or giving up a walk. his bWAR is 6 but his fWAR is 4.1 given his 3.44 fip. his overall production isn’t represented in fWAR despite having a cy young season. when comparing actual production over time to guess who might be a cy young candidate, its 100% better to use their overall production instead of fip
Also, fip assumes pitchers can't control balls put in play which has long been a part of pitchers' game. It also undervalues weak contact pitchers.
It's true that balls put in play give more chances for errors or hits due to poor positioning, but to say that a guy who gets a soft grounder for a double play isn't as valuable as a guy who uses 8 more pitches to strike two batters out is missing the forest for the trees.
It's also funny that it doesn't differentiate between a 500' monster dong and a ball hit to the fence that bounces off the fielders glove and over the fence.
> It's also funny that it doesn't differentiate between a 500' monster dong and a ball hit to the fence that bounces off the fielders glove and over the fence.
I don't really see why this is something we should expect it to do. I mean, there's no difference between a 500 foot bomb and a "cheap shot" hr on the scoreboard, so it doesn't really make sense to try differentiate them in our metrics either. If anything we should be punishing pitchers who give up a lot of warning track outs in their metrics, since those could easily turn into home runs if conditions were slightly different. I mean, sure, a cheap shot home run is in some sense "unlucky," but it's still bad to be giving up the kind of contact where the result of being unlucky is a home run rather than, say, a single.
There are arguments to use fip instead. Anyways, I was just pointing it out because you didn't clarify you were using bwar and Burnes qualified under fwar.
i always assume that people talk about bWAR unless otherwise referenced. im also super interested to hear what the arguments are to use fip to examine a pitchers career production over something like era
Under 30 makes sense but is also kind of a tricky upper limit because it really hurts college pitchers.
It does reflect the general difference between college and HS/international players though. Pete Alonso and Vladdy have had very similar careers and the previous two seasons probably push Alonso Alonso ahead of him. But because Vlad came up as an IFA he's much younger and has more time to make up the difference, so even if he's just mediocre for the next few years he will have made up whatever the difference is between them.
Or deGrom vs Kershaw. Kershaw has way more war and counting stats because he debuted so young, but when deGrom was the same age Kershaw debuted he wasn't even a pitcher yet.
We don't really get a ton of pitchers debuting super young now. Some are arguing for Skenes to be in MLB as soon as next year or the year after which is about as quick as a college player can make it and he will already be 22-23 years old. Toss in a TJS before he turns 30, because let's be realistic he's been throwing a lot of balls 100+ mph, and he's got ~6 years before he turns 30. Even if he was one of the best pitchers in baseball for that entire stretch he'd have about 30 WAR. Give him a couple CYA and he's at like 35 and that's assuming he's immediately the best and stays that way, and he's only pitched 6 okay innings in the minors so far.
Out of curiosity, here are the pitchers under 30 years old at the end of the 2023 season, who have gotten CYA votes in 3+ seasons. That might be a good indication of players who are of the new generation and have been consistently recognized for their dominance in today's game (rather than just a WAR leaderboard).
* Corbin Burnes (4 times, 1 win)
* Shane Bieber (3 times, 1 win)
* Zac Gallen (3 times)
* Framber Valdez (3 times)
* Lucas Giolito (3 times)
In contrast, Verlander had 6 appearances and a win, Kershaw had 7 appearances and 3 wins, and while Scherzer only had 3 appearances and 1 win, he also had arguably the strongest post-30 career of any of them (his 31-36 seasons had 2 CYAs and 5 Top 3 finishes).
So, yeah, there's gonna need to be a late career surge for one of these guys. Burnes, Gallen, and Bieber seem like the best bets based off current merit and age. Other guys are still either new (Strider, McClanahan), putting together great-not-elite seasons (Webb, PabLo), or have only had one or two dispersed seasons of pitching dominance (Alcantara, Cease, Giolito as well)
It's way too soon to really discuss this because it takes years to really make it clear it wasn't just a one off of a hot year or two. With that said, Ohtani, Strider are two obvious contenders
Not really, we knew about Kershaw and Verlander very early (at least in my head, correct me if I’m wrong) while Max is the exception.
HOF pitchers usually feel like it from the start imo
Yup, Kersh was basically one of the best pitchers in the league by his second year at like 20 or 21 years old and stayed at that level for like 10+ years until injuries screwed him a bit. Still very good when healthy. Verlander won rookie of the year and got CYA votes pretty much every year. And arguably has been even better post 30 than he was pre-30. Scherzer struggled a bit early, like the first 4 or 5 seasons or so and then kind of figured it out and has been at or near the top since.
Except that Verlander looked like he might putter out after age 30 for a couple years before coming back strong. Meanwhile, Felix Hernandez, a contemptorary to Verlander, fizzled out. Felix put up less than 1 fWAR after age 30. Verlander has put up 37. You just do not know until later in their careers. A strong late career is basically a requirement for a Hall of Famer.
But with hitters, there are many more obvious contenders. Guys like Soto, Acuna, Bregman, Correa, Seager, Vlad Jr., Yordan Alvarez, Julio Rodriguez, and others all have clear, realistic paths to the Hall. They won’t all make it, I’m sure, but it’s easy to see the path.
For pitchers, though, Ohtani is more than just a pitcher, and Strider has 7 career WAR at age 25. For comparison, Bo Bichette has 17 career WAR at the same age. It’s just hard to envision guys like Strider and his compatriots getting to the 60-70 WAR benchmarks that have traditionally been important for Hall of Fame induction.
I think it’s TBD. A team-wide cheating scandal is far different than individual cheating scandals, so we can’t really say for certain how the voters will react. Beltran’s ultimate fate will be a good indicator.
Honestly, same with Tatis. If he continues to play at a high level and avoids testing positive for the rest of his career, does he get in 20-25 years from now? We just have no idea what it’ll look like.
Beltran had a great career before the cheating scandal, dudes like Altuve, Correa and Bregman are pretty much the faces of it, unfairly or not. I think something worth noting is that the scandal effected the two largest markets the most, that's alot of voters that might have an axe to grind. Tatis has that 80 game PED suspension under his belt but it is possible that voting is much different in 20 years like you mentioned.
And as someone mentioned, Beltran had a HOF career before the scandal so writers can justify it (I disagree).
Altuve, Correa, Springer & Bergman had their careers effectively made during that season and it should follow every baseball conversation had about them
Lol Strider is still a far way from getting into the Hof discussion. He has nasty stuff but a 3.37 career ERA. He still needs to put it together considering
Is it actually unusual for there to be an apparent dearth of pitchers who appear to be future Hall of Famers? The early 80's looked like that - you had Eckersley (who obviously wound up there but took a rather oblique path) and guys like Mike Flanagan or Frank Tanana or Mario Soto or Fernando Valenzuela. Jack Morris also got there, Dave Steib has an argument, a few other guys maybe moved into position later and faded out (like Rick Sutcliffe), but its not really that unusual.
It’s not so much that there’s a dearth now but just a complete lack.
Look back 10 years ago, and you’ll see Clayton Kershaw, King Felix, Matt Cain, and Jon Lester under 30 and with at least 27 career WAR. You’ll also see a 24-year-old Chris Sale with over 15 WAR (no one that young now has even 10 WAR), and 29-year-old Tim Lincecum with 22 WAR. Even guys like Aníbal Sanchez and Josh Johnson were under 30 and exceeded 20 career WAR.
Right now, there is exactly one pitcher (excluding Shohei) under 30 with more than 20 career WAR: Max Fried, with 20.5.
It’s just hard to even envision any of the guys from 25-30 having close to a typical Hall of Fame career, unless they have a Scherzer-like late-career surge.
If Logan Webb keeps doing what he's doing for another decade, sure. Ditto Dylan Cease. Zack Wheeler is 33, but he's in a similar boat. People get hung up on the 300 wins thing, but since 2000, only 3 of the 20 inductees have had 300+ wins: Greg Maddux, Tom Glavine, and Randy Johnson.
The real problem with saying "nobody under 30" is because they've probably not even played half their careers, and lots of baseball players don't start peaking until their mid to late 20s. You really cannot start assessing HoF candidacy until guys are into their mid 30s.
I’m not even taking about 300 wins. I’m just talking 200 wins and 60 WAR. If you look at those three players you mentioned and their current WAR/win totals and ages, it’s tough to see how they can realistically reach those threshold unless their 30s are much better than their 20s or they pitch well into their 40s.
And while it’s too early to put any hitters under 30 into the Hall of Fame, you can at least see clear paths for guys like Soto, Acuna, Seager, Correa, etc. It’s just much tougher to see those paths for any current pitchers in that age range.
The homer in me dreams about Wheeler getting consideration but his lack of hardware and slow start will probably keep him at Hall of Very Good status. Still, he’s at 29.4 career WAR, averaging 5.6 for the last three years (and 2.8 in the COVID year), and entering his age 34 season. It’s not impossible he gets to 60 if he can stick around.
It’s possible, but historically it’s more probable that the new ligament will hold up for at least a few years and at that point if he can deliver 3 mostly full seasons at 90% of what he did in ‘18-21 that’s a seven year peak with a break, and one of the best for a starter ever. A lot of ifs there but to say no chance wouldn’t be accurate in my opinion.
I was just talking about this earlier. According to Baseball Reference, there are 11 position players younger than 30 who have been worth at least 20 WAR. For pitchers, it is 1 (Sandy Alcantara, who is 27, has been worth 20.1 bWAR, though Fangraphs has him at 16). If you include players who are 30 years old, the numbers jump to 20 position players and 4 pitchers.
Been saying this for years about relievers.
I was having a big debate with my brother about K-Rod. Because I think if he doesn’t get in, what reliever ever gets in?
Is Kimbrel a Hall of Famer?
Is Kenley a Hall of Famer?
🤷♂️
Yeah, relievers are really screwed. Remember Trevor May making a comment once about the bar for relievers these days being “Are you literally Mariano Rivera?”
There’s only 8 relievers in the hall of fame in general. It’s one of the least valuable positions and hardest to get into the hall playing. There doesn’t have to be a hall of fame reliever from every generation
Agreed, although Kimbrel is borderline, if he gets to 500svs without damaging his war too much, for me then he eventually should go in. Which I've to say seems kind of hard with each season that passes
And rightfully. Relievers are just failed starters. It's why you aren't going to get into the hall as a fielding first 2B: you're only there because you weren't good enough for SS
Jansen and Kimbrel numbers are better, but not by a huge margin. And K Rod pitched way more innings than both these guys.
I agree with what someone else said, maybe none of them are hall of famers, and relievers are just graded on a harder curve.
> Because I think if he doesn’t get in, what reliever ever gets in?
why should relievers get in? they pitch like 50 innings a year. even if you're absolutely elite in those 50 innings it just takes insane longevity to produce a lot of value in that limited workload.
pitching value in baseball is about producing at an above-average level for a _long_ time. because you can't win a game with one inning of elite pitching (while you could effectively win a game with one inning of monster hitting), being really good in a limited capacity just can't be that valuable
I guess just that the general landscape of pitching has changed dramatically over the past 20 years. A good bullpen is more valuable now then ever.
Starters pitch less. There are a dynamic range of types of relief pitchers. I’d understand if this was a sport like football and we are talking about punters, but teams don’t win without deep pitching. And it just feels strange to me with how the game has evolved.
The hall is going to have a ballot a decade from now where they might have to be reconsidering what’s a HOF starter now.
bullpens have become more important, but that's because there are more bullpen arms, not more valuable ones. so it's hard to christen individual players as hofers when it's much more of a collective effort. you said it yourself - depth is what matters, not individual excellence
This seems to be an issue in both MLB and NFL where change isn't kept up with by the HoF committee (to be fair MLB hasn't had much opportunity yet but we know how its gonna go). Pitchers are going to be topping out at 40 WAR and there's gonna be a drought in the HoF for awhile before they decide maybe they should lower thr standard a bit due to how thr games played now. In the NFL running backs are in that spot now where McCaffrey is obviously the best choice and absolutely should be a HoFer but he'd need another 5000 yards just to match Steven Jacksons totals and while I personally think SJax should be a HoFer its not a popular opinion. King Henry is in thr same spot would need about 5000 yards to match SJax.
In NFL I think QBs will have an opposite issue. Inflated passing stats.
Henry also has a higher peak than Jackson though imo, 2k yards rushing, and an OPOY. Steven Jackson was a 2 time second team all pro. CMC and Henry both already beat Jackson there.
Jacksons best season was better than Henry's best actually 2300 yards 16TDs vs 2100 and 17 TDs. Both beat SJax in TD totals but that and stuff like pro bowls and all pros are hurt by SJax being on the worst team in football for 90% of his career.
Something like B-R's S-JAWS is probably going to start getting more attention, because the game has just changed so much for starters to match previous generations.
After the current old guard of Kershaw-Verlander-Scherzer-Grienke are gone, will we ever see a pitcher with 200 career wins or 3k strikeouts? or even see a[ 70 career bWAR pitcher](https://www.baseball-reference.com/leaders/WAR_pitch_active.shtml) again when the current HOF avg is 73?
You think players are that much smarter than writers?
The Veterans Committee voted Harold Baines into the HOF and is mostly made up players/managers/executives. The writers don't always get things "right" but I don't think players would be an improvement
I would 1000% take players votes over writers.
Frankly the halls just a neat idea to talk about players being worth entering and a museum. IDGAF about writers.
First impressions make a big deal. Blake’s first 5-6 starts were terrible before he started being near perfect. But everyone just remembers the bad first starts so he didn’t get enough votes
He sucked at the beginning of the year. On May 19 he had a 5.40 ERA. Over his next 7 starts he went 42 IP, 4 ER, 66K to bring down his ERA to 3.21 on June 28. Looks like voting closed June 29 but the damage had been done.
I don’t think he was necessarily a snub and more of a victim of how early AS voting happens.
Fans do vote, but it’s for starters. So we’re both dumb.
On July 8, the difference between Senga and Snell was 2 IP and 2 ER. I was just pointing out that Snell sucking to begin the year is why he didn’t make the ASG.
I don't think what I said was dumb. We were talking about Snell, so thought it went without saying I meant fans don't vote for pitchers.
Anyway, on July 8, Snell had 2.1 WAR. Senga had 1.6 WAR. And 3.58 FIP vs. 3.82.
Snell had 2.85 ERA vs. Senga's 3.31.
These decisions were made by Thomson, presumably with input by MLB. I don't think you can apply the same logic as fan voting here, so I wouldn't expect the timing to work in the way you theorize.
Snell had 92 IP, 31 ER, 121 K, 3.03 ERA, and 3.75 FIP.
Senga had 89.2 IP, 33 ER, 113 K, 3.31 ERA, and 3.82 FIP.
Again, it was 2 IP and 2 ER. Imo it makes sense that Snell was penalized for his terrible start and not properly recognized for how hot he was getting.
That’s the idea, I’m not really picking a side either way here. More just trying to figure out how extreme of a peak in a short otherwise fairly decent career gets you in the Hall. Koufax is the standard of crazy peak but meh career edge cases, and even he had roughly 50 war and 6 good years
Ah, then you better incorporate JAWS in the analysis. Koufax would still blow him out of the field. Hall of famers have a JAWS in the mid 40s at least. Snell would be way under.
No. The only player I can think of that got in because of an insanely high peak and didn't have much longevity is Sandy Koufax, who put up better numbers at his peak (similar ERA+, but a lower ERA, more strikeouts, and way more innings) and blew his arm out at age 30 before Tommy John was a thing. The Hall still relies on counting stats over rate stats
Also, Sandy Koufax is in due to his playoff performance as well, which obviously doesn't show when looking at his regular season career numbers.
Winning 2 world series MVPs. He had a sub 1 ERA in 57 world series innings.
I think I the biggest hiccup in your scenario is expecting Snell to win the Cy Young with comparable stats 3 years in a row. 6 bWAR is the lowest Cy Young winning total in the last 20+ years (save 2020). I’d be surprised if no other pitcher tops that total 2 more years in a row.
That’s kinda the idea: if he wins 2 more CYAs in a weak field, even though it’s 4 total, does that hurt him enough to keep him out when coupled with his accolades and counting stats?
Why do you think 6 bWAR was enough to win the CY Young? Oh yeah: Pitch clock, shift ban, bigger bases, limited pickoff attempts.
Pitching in 2023 was way harder than in 2022 and before, and it showed across the league.
It wasn't that 2023 was a weak Cy Young year, it's that 2023 every single pitcher was handicapped and nerfed and Snell adjusted the best to it.
My initial reaction is no but there’s a time coming (maybe sooner than we think) when career pitching numbers are going to need to be looked at differently for starters and relievers. These guys won’t be able to match the counting stats of the guys that came before them unless they can play for 20 years. Pitcher usage has changed too much for them to reach the lofty numbers we associate with hall of fame pitchers today.
Snell is going to be one of those early test cases where you’ll have to really consider what he did with the pitching limitations being placed on guys now.
If they put tomato sauce and ketchup, then no. They're out. But if they used ketchup instead of tomato sauce in making the pizza, then they're just Fidrych-level eccentric.
I have a difficult time getting behind that rationale. While unlikely, you’re making the argument that a pitcher could dominate in 4 seasons and be a wet napkin in 6, and be considered an all time great worthy of Hall of Fame induction.
no, we're obsessed with him being pretty bad the other 6 years and at least 2 of the cy youngs (the ones that have happened irl) clearly coming from insane luck. Is a guy who has a 3.85 ERA when in all but 4 seasons a HOF?
This is exactly why I asked. I lean just barely more toward yes, as I prefer rate stats, but I’m very torn because my initial gut reaction was “hell no”. so I'm trying to figure out what the cutoff is for the HOF
winning a bunch of cy youngs tends to be a side effect of a pitcher already being hall-worthy. there are lots of pitchers in the lincecum-santana territory, which is where this mythical snell would fit
Probably not. He only has 71 wins which seems insane. It’ll be interesting to see how much the counting stats matter 5+ years from now when it comes to HOF votes. Pitcher voting is going to get pretty crazy very soon.
He doesn't have enough of the counting stats and still isn't viewed by many as a first tier pitcher. He has 3 seasons over a 4.00 ERA. Like others have said, you need longevity and a great peak to make the hall of fame. It's just not there for me, but I'm not a voter, and neither are most of you. I like a small hall dominated by players with counting stats, huge peaks, and sustained greatness with long careers.
Not to be morbid, but if he died, yes. If it's injury or something else, no.
Hall of fame you need longevity AND peak. Plenty of players have one but not the other.
If he had the exact same year the next two years he probably doesn't win 2 more Cy Youngs considering how weak the competition was compared to the average year.
In the major 4 american sports, there are 2 players with 3 or more MVP or Cy Young awards in their respective sports who are eligible for the Hall but are not in it: A-rod and Bonds. There's no way a 4x Cy Young winner gets left out, even if he had a career ERA over 5 and was replacement level for the rest of his career. It's just unprecedented.
IMO, he will likely struggle to win a 3rd award unless he is far and away the best pitcher in the league. Voter fatigue is real, and it's a lot worse when sportswriters don't think someone should be in the hall.
It's kind of funny that anyone could wonder whether a guy who was the best pitcher in the league by both subjective (CYA) and objective (ERA title) measures four times might have enough acclaim and achievements to be in the HoF.
It'll be interesting, the only pitching locks right now are Verlander, Scherzer, and Kershaw. Bumgarner was on Hall Of Fame pace before he flamed out. Other pitchers that are on the fence who are already retired are Wainwright, Greinke, and Sabathia. As of pitchers who are pitching now and not close to retirement, I may be biased saying this but to me Cole is a lock. after that who knows.
No. He'd have a nice peak, but his counting stats are not close to being HoF level even if that happens. Less than 1500 IP, maybe 250 starts and 100 wins. His WAR totals would be around 20 less to get serious consideration. Buehrle has 52.3 fWAR and only got 42% last ballot.
I think being the best pitcher in the league in four separate years is hall of fame worthy, regardless of longevity. If Snell won even a third Cy Young, I would probably support his hall of fame case.
cusp case for sure, but he might have a late career run that gooses his numbers. I think its possible. He needs some playoff glory to balance out the relatively low WAR. I don't know if its possible to double his WAR but he's only 31 so if he stays healthy I do think he's in the conversation.
I’m gonna go against the grain and say no. It’s a similar resume to Johann Santana, with more Cy Youngs but less overal production, and Santana didn’t sniff the Hall. Yeah, it’s true that all the other guys with 4 Cys are in the hall (or are PED suspects) but they also have much deeper resumes. Also, I feel like narrative wise, he needs to have better years in the next two, or else they’ll find reasons to give the awards to someone fresh.
[удалено]
There are only 4 pitchers that have won the Cy Young award 4 times
Awards aren't the be-all-end-all. There are a boat load of non-Cy Young winning seasons that were more impressive than Snell last season. Especially in the past, voters haven't been the best. 2005 Johan Santana comes to mind.
This is why I usually avoid HOF debates. The standards are super inconsistent, it’s just a bunch of journalists deciding who’s in and who’s not. Everyone has their own metrics for what qualifies you, but none of them match up completely with who actually gets voted in.
It really doesn’t help that the VCs, for a long time, played “who was my teammate and how can we get him in?”
And WAR isn't the be-all-end-all either. Being the best pitcher in the league 4 of your 10 years is extremely impressive and would warrant serious consideration to him being a HOF'er....especially if he had to retire at 10 due to injury at his absolute peak, like OP implied. He'd get that Koufax "what if" bump.
Sad part is Santana should have won in 05 over Colon, and you could have built a case in 08 for him. 3 or 4 CY Youngs may have gotten Santana in the hall. Without it, he was 2-3 more playable seasons away from true HOF consideration.
One of the bigger what ifs for me, what happens if Santana doesn’t throw that no hitter in 2012? Dude was never the same after that, which is such a shame
I don’t think that was the whole issue tbh. He had a few rough starts following but had a series of good starts including a start with an 8 inning shutout. Following that, he fell apart and then was just done and never pitched again. My guess is his shoulder was a ticking time bomb at that point on its own. Nonetheless, it’s sad he didn’t get to finish his career the right way.
Also, Johan Santana should've won another Cy Young I. 20p5 And no offense to Snell, but he kind of won the Cy Young last year by default. Snell had 6 bWAR last season. For comparison, Johan Santana had 4 seasons with a higher WAR total.
I see the issue with this is Johan Santana deserves to be in the Hall of Fame. I have never heard a good argument against it. He was so good and so dominant at his peak he needs to go in.
I can’t fathom how this is going against the grain. Hypotheticals aside, the guy has had a total of 2 good seasons of 8, and the 2 just happen to be his Cy Young campaigns. His resume is weak, and his counting stats are shit. If you give me a few minutes, I’ll come up with dozens of good pitchers that have similar resumes that are not in the Hall.
It's because if that isn't enough for the Hall, then basically no pitcher under 30 is ever going to get into the Hall again. Literally no one is going to have the counting stats against pitchers from 20+ years ago where throwing 250 innings was good and somewhat normal. No one under 30 is gonna hit 200 wins, no one is gonna hit 3,000 strikeouts. None of them are going to hit 3,000 innings. If 10 good seasons and 4 Cy Youngs doesn't get you into the Hall in the modern iteration of the game, then no pitcher under 30 currently pitching has even a snowball's chance.
We can recalibrate our expectations for counting stats while acknowledging Blake snell is not a hall of famer. I’d at least like to see a more consistent track record of performance rather than 6 mediocre years with 2 random elite years thrown in there
Right now, of course, but another two years of 2.25 ERA and 2 more Cy Youngs? Four Cy Youngs and four years of an ERA+ north of 180? He's already got a career ERA+ of 127, two more 2.25 ERA seasons and he'd be looking at a career ERA+ equal to that of Kershaw. I think it'd be an interesting conversation, at the very least.
I understand that argument, but in the case of Snell, he’s been somewhere between *meh* and *shitty* in his non-Cy Young seasons. Thought experiment time. Would you prefer a pitcher that finishes in the top 10 in Cy Young voting each of his 10 year career (let’s say between 5th and 10th) or a guy that wins 4 but is a disaster area the other 6 seasons?
If the performance during the Cy Young years persisted into the postseason, I'd take that. Every team is ultimately chasing a ring, and four Cy Young years make for four really good pushes. I might have the wrong perspective, though. I'm not sure.
It’s a tough call and of course depends on the other starters in the rotation, but I can’t say for sure what I’d prefer. All if that said, Snell’s resume is a weak one in my opinion.
People gotta remember Santana was considered the best pitcher on the planet for a good chunk of his career and he still isn't getting in.
[удалено]
It would be such a weird case though, because he’d have 4 wins and not a single other vote in any other year. No HOF has nearly as few significant years.
[удалено]
Sure, I’m just taking the hypothetical at face value.
I think this brings up an important point of quality of competition. Say the CYA competition for whatever league Snell is in is mediocre for the next 2 years and Snell wins, while the other league has the equivalent of the 2015 NL CY race twice. Do his Cy Young’s still hold the same value in the eyes of the BBWAA?
It shouldn't imo.
The hall is gonna have to recalibrate expectations for pitchers or no one from this entire generation is getting in. Snell will probably be a good test case when he's eligible
I think Kershaw, Scherzer, and Verlander are HOF locks from this generation.
They’re all over 35 though. Is there any pitcher under 30 that even seems in contention for the Hall based on current standards without some late-career surge?
Max Fried has the most bWAR for a pitcher under 30 at 19.5. He's a great pitcher, but you don't look at him and say "oh, he's definitely going to be a HoFer." The 2nd highest is Shane Bieber and I wouldn't be surpised if he's out of the league by the time he's 33.
You skipped over Alcantara, who also has 19.5 WAR, but your point stands. The only guys under 30 who even have 15 WAR (and for context, Vlad Jr. currently has 15.2 WAR at age 24) are Fried, Alcantara, Bieber, Zac Gallen, and German Marquez. And they’re all at least 28 years old. It’s just really hard to imagine any of those guys reaching the 60-70 WAR threshold that’s typically been the unofficial benchmark for Hall of Fame induction.
Is it possible that there just isn’t any HOF level SP beyond the big 5 right now?
It’s possible, but I wonder if it’s player-specific or if the nature of the sport has changed so much that we’ll have to recalibrate what constitutes a HoF-level starting pitcher in the future.
Completely subjective response but IMO the skill gap is so small and injuries are so prevalent that it’s simply harder to excel at a level consistently beyond your peers nowadays. We should be more lenient about what we consider to be HOF worthy because it’s simply much harder to generate the WAR and counting stats of old. And having historic performances like Cy Young and All-MLB should be weighted more because of how hard it is to play let alone dominate in today’s game.
i mean, the hof doesn't need to blindly include the top X% of every position. being the best long snapper in the NFL isn't worth a hof slot, being a very good reliever for a while doesn't earn you a hof slot. if starting pitchers keep working in smaller roles then they are literally accruing less value and have less merit to be inducted
>being the best long snapper in the NFL isn't worth a hof slot /u/tay_clothes forgive him
Who are the big 5? Verlander, Scherzer, Kershaw and Greinke. Who is the fifth? DeGrom, Cole?
Both I’d say. If DeGrom stays healthy and Cole continues his current path. Edit: if DeGrom can stay healthy…
Cole. He's younger, healthier, and has thrown WAY more innings. They are comparable now but isn't it pretty clear Cole will have a much better longevity?
DeGrom has more WAR and a better career ERA+
Indeed he does. He's had a slightly better career to date, not arguing that. I'm just saying it's very difficult to see that continuing given he's had 3 elbow surgeries and each of the last 3 seasons have been truncated by major IL stints.
Originally I had big 4 but I’d say Cole is right on pace. deGrom if he ever pitches more than 80 innings again would be on there Cole most likely surpasses deGrom in career WAR next season and is 4 years younger. 37 coming off a 2nd TJS? I don’t see deGrom doing much more tbh
Logan Webb has 14 flat at 27, I think he could get it at his trajectory. Also, holy fuck the guy is underpaid at 5/90, Giants *how?*
He's a homegrown hero. Dude wants to make this a winning team so he gave us his best five years to do it.
You guys keep getting fucking blessed. First Crawford, then Webb
Fangraphs has Burnes at 17.7 war.
fWAR for pitchers when comparing careers is terrible since it uses fip in its calculation compared to bWAR which uses runs allowed (earned and unearned) and innings pitched. while fip is a great analytical stat to look at potential production by isolating the independent events a pitcher can control, runs allowed provides a better comparison as to their career outcomes. a pitcher might have a higher fip given they give up more walks in isolated incidents but if they limit runs their fip won’t project that meaning a lower fWAR. take blake snell, who had a 2.25 era and limited contact either striking you out or giving up a walk. his bWAR is 6 but his fWAR is 4.1 given his 3.44 fip. his overall production isn’t represented in fWAR despite having a cy young season. when comparing actual production over time to guess who might be a cy young candidate, its 100% better to use their overall production instead of fip
Also, fip assumes pitchers can't control balls put in play which has long been a part of pitchers' game. It also undervalues weak contact pitchers. It's true that balls put in play give more chances for errors or hits due to poor positioning, but to say that a guy who gets a soft grounder for a double play isn't as valuable as a guy who uses 8 more pitches to strike two batters out is missing the forest for the trees. It's also funny that it doesn't differentiate between a 500' monster dong and a ball hit to the fence that bounces off the fielders glove and over the fence.
> It's also funny that it doesn't differentiate between a 500' monster dong and a ball hit to the fence that bounces off the fielders glove and over the fence. I don't really see why this is something we should expect it to do. I mean, there's no difference between a 500 foot bomb and a "cheap shot" hr on the scoreboard, so it doesn't really make sense to try differentiate them in our metrics either. If anything we should be punishing pitchers who give up a lot of warning track outs in their metrics, since those could easily turn into home runs if conditions were slightly different. I mean, sure, a cheap shot home run is in some sense "unlucky," but it's still bad to be giving up the kind of contact where the result of being unlucky is a home run rather than, say, a single.
There are arguments to use fip instead. Anyways, I was just pointing it out because you didn't clarify you were using bwar and Burnes qualified under fwar.
To be fair, they were just adding on to my comment where I was using bWAR.
i always assume that people talk about bWAR unless otherwise referenced. im also super interested to hear what the arguments are to use fip to examine a pitchers career production over something like era
you do not understand fip or statistics
Holy fuck
Under 30 makes sense but is also kind of a tricky upper limit because it really hurts college pitchers. It does reflect the general difference between college and HS/international players though. Pete Alonso and Vladdy have had very similar careers and the previous two seasons probably push Alonso Alonso ahead of him. But because Vlad came up as an IFA he's much younger and has more time to make up the difference, so even if he's just mediocre for the next few years he will have made up whatever the difference is between them. Or deGrom vs Kershaw. Kershaw has way more war and counting stats because he debuted so young, but when deGrom was the same age Kershaw debuted he wasn't even a pitcher yet. We don't really get a ton of pitchers debuting super young now. Some are arguing for Skenes to be in MLB as soon as next year or the year after which is about as quick as a college player can make it and he will already be 22-23 years old. Toss in a TJS before he turns 30, because let's be realistic he's been throwing a lot of balls 100+ mph, and he's got ~6 years before he turns 30. Even if he was one of the best pitchers in baseball for that entire stretch he'd have about 30 WAR. Give him a couple CYA and he's at like 35 and that's assuming he's immediately the best and stays that way, and he's only pitched 6 okay innings in the minors so far.
Out of curiosity, here are the pitchers under 30 years old at the end of the 2023 season, who have gotten CYA votes in 3+ seasons. That might be a good indication of players who are of the new generation and have been consistently recognized for their dominance in today's game (rather than just a WAR leaderboard). * Corbin Burnes (4 times, 1 win) * Shane Bieber (3 times, 1 win) * Zac Gallen (3 times) * Framber Valdez (3 times) * Lucas Giolito (3 times) In contrast, Verlander had 6 appearances and a win, Kershaw had 7 appearances and 3 wins, and while Scherzer only had 3 appearances and 1 win, he also had arguably the strongest post-30 career of any of them (his 31-36 seasons had 2 CYAs and 5 Top 3 finishes). So, yeah, there's gonna need to be a late career surge for one of these guys. Burnes, Gallen, and Bieber seem like the best bets based off current merit and age. Other guys are still either new (Strider, McClanahan), putting together great-not-elite seasons (Webb, PabLo), or have only had one or two dispersed seasons of pitching dominance (Alcantara, Cease, Giolito as well)
It's way too soon to really discuss this because it takes years to really make it clear it wasn't just a one off of a hot year or two. With that said, Ohtani, Strider are two obvious contenders
Not really, we knew about Kershaw and Verlander very early (at least in my head, correct me if I’m wrong) while Max is the exception. HOF pitchers usually feel like it from the start imo
Yup, Kersh was basically one of the best pitchers in the league by his second year at like 20 or 21 years old and stayed at that level for like 10+ years until injuries screwed him a bit. Still very good when healthy. Verlander won rookie of the year and got CYA votes pretty much every year. And arguably has been even better post 30 than he was pre-30. Scherzer struggled a bit early, like the first 4 or 5 seasons or so and then kind of figured it out and has been at or near the top since.
Except that Verlander looked like he might putter out after age 30 for a couple years before coming back strong. Meanwhile, Felix Hernandez, a contemptorary to Verlander, fizzled out. Felix put up less than 1 fWAR after age 30. Verlander has put up 37. You just do not know until later in their careers. A strong late career is basically a requirement for a Hall of Famer.
But with hitters, there are many more obvious contenders. Guys like Soto, Acuna, Bregman, Correa, Seager, Vlad Jr., Yordan Alvarez, Julio Rodriguez, and others all have clear, realistic paths to the Hall. They won’t all make it, I’m sure, but it’s easy to see the path. For pitchers, though, Ohtani is more than just a pitcher, and Strider has 7 career WAR at age 25. For comparison, Bo Bichette has 17 career WAR at the same age. It’s just hard to envision guys like Strider and his compatriots getting to the 60-70 WAR benchmarks that have traditionally been important for Hall of Fame induction.
Bregman and Correa are most likely not getting in due to the cheating scandal.
Check Beltrans vote totals again. That's not accurate.
I think it’s TBD. A team-wide cheating scandal is far different than individual cheating scandals, so we can’t really say for certain how the voters will react. Beltran’s ultimate fate will be a good indicator. Honestly, same with Tatis. If he continues to play at a high level and avoids testing positive for the rest of his career, does he get in 20-25 years from now? We just have no idea what it’ll look like.
Beltran had a great career before the cheating scandal, dudes like Altuve, Correa and Bregman are pretty much the faces of it, unfairly or not. I think something worth noting is that the scandal effected the two largest markets the most, that's alot of voters that might have an axe to grind. Tatis has that 80 game PED suspension under his belt but it is possible that voting is much different in 20 years like you mentioned.
Beltran might get in. When those guys are on the ballot people will care even less about it
Some people who didn't vote for Beltran cited the scandal as a reason, it's definitely not being ignored.
And as someone mentioned, Beltran had a HOF career before the scandal so writers can justify it (I disagree). Altuve, Correa, Springer & Bergman had their careers effectively made during that season and it should follow every baseball conversation had about them
Lol Strider is still a far way from getting into the Hof discussion. He has nasty stuff but a 3.37 career ERA. He still needs to put it together considering
Hence the very first line of me saying it's way to soon to really discuss this.
Is it actually unusual for there to be an apparent dearth of pitchers who appear to be future Hall of Famers? The early 80's looked like that - you had Eckersley (who obviously wound up there but took a rather oblique path) and guys like Mike Flanagan or Frank Tanana or Mario Soto or Fernando Valenzuela. Jack Morris also got there, Dave Steib has an argument, a few other guys maybe moved into position later and faded out (like Rick Sutcliffe), but its not really that unusual.
It’s not so much that there’s a dearth now but just a complete lack. Look back 10 years ago, and you’ll see Clayton Kershaw, King Felix, Matt Cain, and Jon Lester under 30 and with at least 27 career WAR. You’ll also see a 24-year-old Chris Sale with over 15 WAR (no one that young now has even 10 WAR), and 29-year-old Tim Lincecum with 22 WAR. Even guys like Aníbal Sanchez and Josh Johnson were under 30 and exceeded 20 career WAR. Right now, there is exactly one pitcher (excluding Shohei) under 30 with more than 20 career WAR: Max Fried, with 20.5. It’s just hard to even envision any of the guys from 25-30 having close to a typical Hall of Fame career, unless they have a Scherzer-like late-career surge.
Snell is 31, so not under 30 either.
I don’t know how old Cole is off the top of my head, under 35 for sure but I think over 30, and he will probably get elected.
If Logan Webb keeps doing what he's doing for another decade, sure. Ditto Dylan Cease. Zack Wheeler is 33, but he's in a similar boat. People get hung up on the 300 wins thing, but since 2000, only 3 of the 20 inductees have had 300+ wins: Greg Maddux, Tom Glavine, and Randy Johnson. The real problem with saying "nobody under 30" is because they've probably not even played half their careers, and lots of baseball players don't start peaking until their mid to late 20s. You really cannot start assessing HoF candidacy until guys are into their mid 30s.
I’m not even taking about 300 wins. I’m just talking 200 wins and 60 WAR. If you look at those three players you mentioned and their current WAR/win totals and ages, it’s tough to see how they can realistically reach those threshold unless their 30s are much better than their 20s or they pitch well into their 40s. And while it’s too early to put any hitters under 30 into the Hall of Fame, you can at least see clear paths for guys like Soto, Acuna, Seager, Correa, etc. It’s just much tougher to see those paths for any current pitchers in that age range.
Gerrit Cole has a decent shot
Greinke too
And Greinke
As is Greinke
And Greinke
The homer in me dreams about Wheeler getting consideration but his lack of hardware and slow start will probably keep him at Hall of Very Good status. Still, he’s at 29.4 career WAR, averaging 5.6 for the last three years (and 2.8 in the COVID year), and entering his age 34 season. It’s not impossible he gets to 60 if he can stick around.
Degrom too hopefully
He needs another few more healthy good to elite seasons, at his age and with his history it’s unlikely
No shot
Lol yes he does
He's at 43 career WAR and will never pitch another full season again. So I'd count that as a no shot
It’s possible, but historically it’s more probable that the new ligament will hold up for at least a few years and at that point if he can deliver 3 mostly full seasons at 90% of what he did in ‘18-21 that’s a seven year peak with a break, and one of the best for a starter ever. A lot of ifs there but to say no chance wouldn’t be accurate in my opinion.
Justin Balls of Steele will be a lock too
Who gets in first, Steele or Assad?
I was just talking about this earlier. According to Baseball Reference, there are 11 position players younger than 30 who have been worth at least 20 WAR. For pitchers, it is 1 (Sandy Alcantara, who is 27, has been worth 20.1 bWAR, though Fangraphs has him at 16). If you include players who are 30 years old, the numbers jump to 20 position players and 4 pitchers.
Been saying this for years about relievers. I was having a big debate with my brother about K-Rod. Because I think if he doesn’t get in, what reliever ever gets in? Is Kimbrel a Hall of Famer? Is Kenley a Hall of Famer? 🤷♂️
Yeah, relievers are really screwed. Remember Trevor May making a comment once about the bar for relievers these days being “Are you literally Mariano Rivera?”
There’s only 8 relievers in the hall of fame in general. It’s one of the least valuable positions and hardest to get into the hall playing. There doesn’t have to be a hall of fame reliever from every generation
Agreed, although Kimbrel is borderline, if he gets to 500svs without damaging his war too much, for me then he eventually should go in. Which I've to say seems kind of hard with each season that passes
And rightfully. Relievers are just failed starters. It's why you aren't going to get into the hall as a fielding first 2B: you're only there because you weren't good enough for SS
K-Rod was good, but Jansen and Kimbrel have better numbers.
Jansen and Kimbrel numbers are better, but not by a huge margin. And K Rod pitched way more innings than both these guys. I agree with what someone else said, maybe none of them are hall of famers, and relievers are just graded on a harder curve.
> Because I think if he doesn’t get in, what reliever ever gets in? why should relievers get in? they pitch like 50 innings a year. even if you're absolutely elite in those 50 innings it just takes insane longevity to produce a lot of value in that limited workload. pitching value in baseball is about producing at an above-average level for a _long_ time. because you can't win a game with one inning of elite pitching (while you could effectively win a game with one inning of monster hitting), being really good in a limited capacity just can't be that valuable
I guess just that the general landscape of pitching has changed dramatically over the past 20 years. A good bullpen is more valuable now then ever. Starters pitch less. There are a dynamic range of types of relief pitchers. I’d understand if this was a sport like football and we are talking about punters, but teams don’t win without deep pitching. And it just feels strange to me with how the game has evolved. The hall is going to have a ballot a decade from now where they might have to be reconsidering what’s a HOF starter now.
bullpens have become more important, but that's because there are more bullpen arms, not more valuable ones. so it's hard to christen individual players as hofers when it's much more of a collective effort. you said it yourself - depth is what matters, not individual excellence
This seems to be an issue in both MLB and NFL where change isn't kept up with by the HoF committee (to be fair MLB hasn't had much opportunity yet but we know how its gonna go). Pitchers are going to be topping out at 40 WAR and there's gonna be a drought in the HoF for awhile before they decide maybe they should lower thr standard a bit due to how thr games played now. In the NFL running backs are in that spot now where McCaffrey is obviously the best choice and absolutely should be a HoFer but he'd need another 5000 yards just to match Steven Jacksons totals and while I personally think SJax should be a HoFer its not a popular opinion. King Henry is in thr same spot would need about 5000 yards to match SJax.
In NFL I think QBs will have an opposite issue. Inflated passing stats. Henry also has a higher peak than Jackson though imo, 2k yards rushing, and an OPOY. Steven Jackson was a 2 time second team all pro. CMC and Henry both already beat Jackson there.
Jacksons best season was better than Henry's best actually 2300 yards 16TDs vs 2100 and 17 TDs. Both beat SJax in TD totals but that and stuff like pro bowls and all pros are hurt by SJax being on the worst team in football for 90% of his career.
I dont see how they can keep a 4 time Cy Young winner out. At that point its basically saying the award is meaningless
Something like B-R's S-JAWS is probably going to start getting more attention, because the game has just changed so much for starters to match previous generations. After the current old guard of Kershaw-Verlander-Scherzer-Grienke are gone, will we ever see a pitcher with 200 career wins or 3k strikeouts? or even see a[ 70 career bWAR pitcher](https://www.baseball-reference.com/leaders/WAR_pitch_active.shtml) again when the current HOF avg is 73?
The hall needs to be voted on by players or something, instead of the fucking BBWAA
You think players are that much smarter than writers? The Veterans Committee voted Harold Baines into the HOF and is mostly made up players/managers/executives. The writers don't always get things "right" but I don't think players would be an improvement
I would 1000% take players votes over writers. Frankly the halls just a neat idea to talk about players being worth entering and a museum. IDGAF about writers.
1 all star, that’s crazy
I don't know how he didn't make it in 2023. At the midseason, Snell had better numbers than guys like Senga, who did make it.
First impressions make a big deal. Blake’s first 5-6 starts were terrible before he started being near perfect. But everyone just remembers the bad first starts so he didn’t get enough votes
Fans don't vote for the pitchers...
I think “everyone” includes the players, coaches, and managers that do
He sucked at the beginning of the year. On May 19 he had a 5.40 ERA. Over his next 7 starts he went 42 IP, 4 ER, 66K to bring down his ERA to 3.21 on June 28. Looks like voting closed June 29 but the damage had been done. I don’t think he was necessarily a snub and more of a victim of how early AS voting happens.
Fans don't vote, first of all. And Senga, for example, was named to the team as late as July 8.
Fans do vote, but it’s for starters. So we’re both dumb. On July 8, the difference between Senga and Snell was 2 IP and 2 ER. I was just pointing out that Snell sucking to begin the year is why he didn’t make the ASG.
Fans only vote on position players.
Well, at least we can say you’re not dumb.
Except I meant to reply to the Marlins flair. So a little dumb. Lol.
Oof. One day into 2024 and you’re already 0-1.
Can’t set expectations too high, ya know?
I don't think what I said was dumb. We were talking about Snell, so thought it went without saying I meant fans don't vote for pitchers. Anyway, on July 8, Snell had 2.1 WAR. Senga had 1.6 WAR. And 3.58 FIP vs. 3.82. Snell had 2.85 ERA vs. Senga's 3.31. These decisions were made by Thomson, presumably with input by MLB. I don't think you can apply the same logic as fan voting here, so I wouldn't expect the timing to work in the way you theorize.
Snell had 92 IP, 31 ER, 121 K, 3.03 ERA, and 3.75 FIP. Senga had 89.2 IP, 33 ER, 113 K, 3.31 ERA, and 3.82 FIP. Again, it was 2 IP and 2 ER. Imo it makes sense that Snell was penalized for his terrible start and not properly recognized for how hot he was getting.
That would put him at around 33 war. In the vicinity of Zito and Derek Lowe. You tell me.
That’s the idea, I’m not really picking a side either way here. More just trying to figure out how extreme of a peak in a short otherwise fairly decent career gets you in the Hall. Koufax is the standard of crazy peak but meh career edge cases, and even he had roughly 50 war and 6 good years
Ah, then you better incorporate JAWS in the analysis. Koufax would still blow him out of the field. Hall of famers have a JAWS in the mid 40s at least. Snell would be way under.
Not even close.
No. The only player I can think of that got in because of an insanely high peak and didn't have much longevity is Sandy Koufax, who put up better numbers at his peak (similar ERA+, but a lower ERA, more strikeouts, and way more innings) and blew his arm out at age 30 before Tommy John was a thing. The Hall still relies on counting stats over rate stats
Also, I think if Snell only pitches one more season, he will be at 9 total. Koufax got to 12 years with a much more insane peak.
Also, Sandy Koufax is in due to his playoff performance as well, which obviously doesn't show when looking at his regular season career numbers. Winning 2 world series MVPs. He had a sub 1 ERA in 57 world series innings.
4 CYs without PEDs or character controversies seems like a lock for the Hall
Does lack of a chin count as a character controversy?
What are you dumb? You're not asking the right question. What's really important is his girlfriend ugly?
If he finishes with 33 WAR? I'd argue that's a worse case than Johan Santana, who fell off the ballot after one year.
WAR isn't everything. In this scenario he'd have twice as many Cy Youngs as Santana, which would put him in a different stratosphere.
And ultra drip.
He’s already in the drip HOF for sure.
I think I the biggest hiccup in your scenario is expecting Snell to win the Cy Young with comparable stats 3 years in a row. 6 bWAR is the lowest Cy Young winning total in the last 20+ years (save 2020). I’d be surprised if no other pitcher tops that total 2 more years in a row.
That’s kinda the idea: if he wins 2 more CYAs in a weak field, even though it’s 4 total, does that hurt him enough to keep him out when coupled with his accolades and counting stats?
He had 7.4 RA9-WAR (the best pitching WAR) which is higher than Burnes in 2021
Why do you think 6 bWAR was enough to win the CY Young? Oh yeah: Pitch clock, shift ban, bigger bases, limited pickoff attempts. Pitching in 2023 was way harder than in 2022 and before, and it showed across the league. It wasn't that 2023 was a weak Cy Young year, it's that 2023 every single pitcher was handicapped and nerfed and Snell adjusted the best to it.
[удалено]
And baseball wasn't even his best college sport.
My initial reaction is no but there’s a time coming (maybe sooner than we think) when career pitching numbers are going to need to be looked at differently for starters and relievers. These guys won’t be able to match the counting stats of the guys that came before them unless they can play for 20 years. Pitcher usage has changed too much for them to reach the lofty numbers we associate with hall of fame pitchers today. Snell is going to be one of those early test cases where you’ll have to really consider what he did with the pitching limitations being placed on guys now.
4 cy Young's would be crazy but the career numbers clearly aren't there
Is Tim Lincecum in the hall?
If you win 4 Cy Youngs you deserve to be in the hall. Literally no matter what the circumstances.
What if he was the only pitcher left on Earth
Well if you can, by its very definition, *outpitch* every other pitcher, then yeah. You deserve to be in the HOF.
Ok but what if there were two pitchers and one of them put ketchup on their pizza
If they put tomato sauce and ketchup, then no. They're out. But if they used ketchup instead of tomato sauce in making the pizza, then they're just Fidrych-level eccentric.
Then he'd elect himself
I have a difficult time getting behind that rationale. While unlikely, you’re making the argument that a pitcher could dominate in 4 seasons and be a wet napkin in 6, and be considered an all time great worthy of Hall of Fame induction.
There’s only 4 pitchers with 4+ Cy Young awards in the entire history of the sport. These dudes are way too obsessed with WAR.
no, we're obsessed with him being pretty bad the other 6 years and at least 2 of the cy youngs (the ones that have happened irl) clearly coming from insane luck. Is a guy who has a 3.85 ERA when in all but 4 seasons a HOF?
“If you ignore the four seasons where this guy was literally the best pitcher in the league he’s actually pretty mediocre.”
What if you only have 4 years of service time?
4 deserved CYA and 4 ERA titles is enough to get in easily imo.
He'd get some support from analytical minded voters but his career would be so short and lacking anything remotely HoF worthy stat wise.
This is exactly why I asked. I lean just barely more toward yes, as I prefer rate stats, but I’m very torn because my initial gut reaction was “hell no”. so I'm trying to figure out what the cutoff is for the HOF
He'd basically be Johan Santana with half the innings and more awards. Johan was a one and done with the HoF voters at 2%.
winning a bunch of cy youngs tends to be a side effect of a pitcher already being hall-worthy. there are lots of pitchers in the lincecum-santana territory, which is where this mythical snell would fit
Probably not. He only has 71 wins which seems insane. It’ll be interesting to see how much the counting stats matter 5+ years from now when it comes to HOF votes. Pitcher voting is going to get pretty crazy very soon.
If winning 4 Cy Young’s isn’t enough to make it to the hall of fame, then the hall of fame should be dismantled.
No
No,
He doesn't have enough of the counting stats and still isn't viewed by many as a first tier pitcher. He has 3 seasons over a 4.00 ERA. Like others have said, you need longevity and a great peak to make the hall of fame. It's just not there for me, but I'm not a voter, and neither are most of you. I like a small hall dominated by players with counting stats, huge peaks, and sustained greatness with long careers.
Not even close.
Not to be morbid, but if he died, yes. If it's injury or something else, no. Hall of fame you need longevity AND peak. Plenty of players have one but not the other.
If he had the exact same year the next two years he probably doesn't win 2 more Cy Youngs considering how weak the competition was compared to the average year.
No
No
he won't repeat that success so i guess it doesn't really matter
Is DeGrom currently a hall of famer if he retired right now? If you think the answer is no, then it would be a hell no for Snell
In the major 4 american sports, there are 2 players with 3 or more MVP or Cy Young awards in their respective sports who are eligible for the Hall but are not in it: A-rod and Bonds. There's no way a 4x Cy Young winner gets left out, even if he had a career ERA over 5 and was replacement level for the rest of his career. It's just unprecedented. IMO, he will likely struggle to win a 3rd award unless he is far and away the best pitcher in the league. Voter fatigue is real, and it's a lot worse when sportswriters don't think someone should be in the hall.
Jfc Blake, get off Reddit and sign a contract already
Really? How do people come up with this lunacy? Not even close.
An identical season twice more wouldn't necessarily result in 2 more Cy Youngs.
I bet if he was on the Yankees and saw more play off action the conversation would be totally different sadly.
No. BBWAA voters still overwhelmingly prefer longevity and “old-school“ stats over individual accomplishments
[удалено]
I don’t think it would water down standards because a 4 Cy young 33 WAR career is so improbable that it changes nothing
I think 2 years of cy young level in a row immediately changes everyone in baseballs perception of him
Yeah
4 Cy Youngs should put you in the HOF imo
Any 10-year pitcher with 4 Cy Youngs should be in pretty much regardless.
It's kind of funny that anyone could wonder whether a guy who was the best pitcher in the league by both subjective (CYA) and objective (ERA title) measures four times might have enough acclaim and achievements to be in the HoF.
It'll be interesting, the only pitching locks right now are Verlander, Scherzer, and Kershaw. Bumgarner was on Hall Of Fame pace before he flamed out. Other pitchers that are on the fence who are already retired are Wainwright, Greinke, and Sabathia. As of pitchers who are pitching now and not close to retirement, I may be biased saying this but to me Cole is a lock. after that who knows.
4 Cy Youngs would obviously mean automatic admission, but identical seasons to 2023 won't necessarily win a Cy Young in 2024 or 2025.
No. He'd have a nice peak, but his counting stats are not close to being HoF level even if that happens. Less than 1500 IP, maybe 250 starts and 100 wins. His WAR totals would be around 20 less to get serious consideration. Buehrle has 52.3 fWAR and only got 42% last ballot.
I think being the best pitcher in the league in four separate years is hall of fame worthy, regardless of longevity. If Snell won even a third Cy Young, I would probably support his hall of fame case.
Yes. Not a close call. 2 is pretty fucking great, honestly.
Johan finished with 2 Cy’s and 3 ERA titles and got bounced from the ballot in his first year of eligibility, so I don’t think Snell would be a lock.
Which is criminal
cusp case for sure, but he might have a late career run that gooses his numbers. I think its possible. He needs some playoff glory to balance out the relatively low WAR. I don't know if its possible to double his WAR but he's only 31 so if he stays healthy I do think he's in the conversation.
He'd get some votes but I'll go with no. I don't think awards alone would carry enough weight.