Doc Gooden...Not-a-doubter!!

[kranepool]

Over his first ten seasons (before his troubles caught up to him, finally stealing from him the almost supernatural talent he displayed consistently) he put up the following numbers:

154 Wins 81 Losses (.655 Winning Pct.)
3.03 ERA
1.04 Baserunners/IP
1800+ SO vs. less than 500 BB

DOMINATING!

Any Ideas???

[tibber]

maybe if he'd blown out his arm without the help of drugs, he'd get more of a look at the hall. as it is, he's not getting in without a ticket.

[kranepool]

the Doc will soon be elected:

the numbers are as good or better than some already in;
world series champ with the metsies AND the yanks;
overcame his problems and although only a shadow of his old self he threw a no no and pitched in the world series for the eventual champion yanks

by 2010...there will be a doctor in the house!

what say you?

[ElHalo]

No. No how, no way, no chance. Not ever. Never ever never never ever never. Not gonna happen.

And I'm a fan of his.

[tibber]

all the voters are going to see is the cocaine problem. that's why dave parker and keith hernandez aren't getting in anytime soon. it's probably not fair (wasn't the soon to be inducted paul molitor also implicated in the pittsburgh drug trial?) but that's the way it is.

[julusnc]

I always always a fan of the mid 1980's New York Mets with Doc pitching and Darryl hitting life was good.

I have read somewhere a post about how Doc Gooden getting hurt in 1988-89 leading to his early decline more so than the drugs.

Doc was awesome but he will never make the Hall of Fame.

Put Gooden in with the sometimes great sometimes awesome pitchers - aka Cone, Saberhagen, Appier, Stewart and Hershiser.

[kranepool]

My friend,

Gooden sports a lifetime .634 winning pct. (194 - 112)
2293 Lifetime K's in 2800 2/3 IP
Only Lifetime 954 BB
13 Seasons with ERA at least .90 runs lower than league average!
1985 Season: 24 - 4, 1.53 ERA - more than 2.00 runs lower than NL Avg, 276.67 IP (268 K w/69 BB)...one of the best 25 seasons ever!!

Dave

[ElHalo]

Sorry, it's not happening.

Gooden was awesome at the beginning of his career, sure... but after 1987 (when he was all of 22 years old), he NEVER had a qualifying season with an ERA+ better than 114. Not one. At all.

You're flat out wrong on him having 13 seasons with an ERA 0.90 less than league average... he had TWO such seasons, 1984 and 1985... and that's it. He never did it again (except 1998, when he didn't pitch enough innings to qualify).

He's 111th among pitchers in grey ink. He was never in the top 10 in W, ERA, or K rate after 1991... when he was 26.

Sorry, buddy. Doc was a great pitcher. But when your career is effectively over by age 26... you're not going to the Hall.

[kranepool]

i am not an expert, but i think that koufax was below average for several years, until he put it all together and dominated for five or six years in the early and mid-sixties. do not misunderstand me about this, koufax at his best was significantly better than doc at his best. what i AM saying is that doc was one of the best pitchers for six or seven years (out of 13ish) and koufax was stunningly amazing (better than doc) for six or seven seasons (out of 13ish). if you do not agree with me that were doc's numbers exactly the same for the second part of his career as they were for the first, he would be HOF bound, then how does koufax get in if he only dominated for a relatively short amount of time??

[kranepool]

i may be reading the stats incorrectly, but goodens stat line indicates that his era was indeed better than the nl-average for the number of years i suggest...if i am wrong, please help me read the info correctly.

thanks,
dave

[leecemark]

--Gooden was more than a run better than the league era his first two years, .70 better his third year and his best year over the next 13 was .48 better than league (in a year when he pitched enough innings to qualify).
--His rookie year was excellent for anyone and amazing for a teenager. His second season was one of the great seasons ever and he was very good for two more. Years 5-9 he was 1% better than league, 13% better, 2% worse, 1% better and 5% worse. For his career he ended up 10% better than the league in ERA+ (era relative to league and adjusted for park effects). With his modest career totals that is not nearly dominant enough. Maybe, but probably not, he would have a chance had his decline not been at least partly self inflicted.
--He really only had the one season of truely dominant play that you need to make the Hall with less than 200 wins. I just can't see it happening for Doc. Its a shame, for a brief moment he was the best I ever saw pitch.

[Freakshow]

It always helps to look at the voting support for similar players to determine how your guy might fare. Ron Guidry is about as close to a ringer for Gooden as you'll find: one big year, 3-4 more really good years, played in NY, great W-L pct, short of 200 wins.

Guidry's HOF voting record:


Year Election Votes Pct
1994 BBWAA 24 5.27
1995 BBWAA 25 5.43
1996 BBWAA 37 7.87
1997 BBWAA 31 6.55
1998 BBWAA 37 7.82
1999 BBWAA 31 6.24
2000 BBWAA 44 8.82
2001 BBWAA 27 5.24
2002 BBWAA 23 4.87

Never had 10% support and doesn't carry the baggage that Dwight has.

Gooden will be lucky to get the 5% needed to continue. Valenzuela is another that comes to mind and he was bounced off after his 2nd year.

[Zito75]

the Doc will soon be elected:

the numbers are as good or better than some already in;
world series champ with the metsies AND the yanks;
overcame his problems and although only a shadow of his old self he threw a no no and pitched in the world series for the eventual champion yanks

by 2010...there will be a doctor in the house!

what say you?

Gooden is not the only one on crack. That's what I think. :laugh

[santotohof]

Man,I was third row next to the Pirate dugout the night in Sept. when Doc needed 16 k's to bust Herb Scores rookie record.I had chills watching him.16 Buccos down and I remember telling my girlfriend( who I am sure could not have cared less :crazy ) on the way home from Shea that we were seeing the greatest pitcher we'd ever see.The next year he was unreal and in 86 I got to see him and Ryan( with a broken foot it turned out!) go to ten innings until Darryl won it with a dinger in the playoffs.My feelings on Doc were so utterly dissapointed in his life choices. He was unreal and could have made us all forget the rest but he'd rather hit the pipe. Do not forget that after Steinbrenner gave him a reprieve he ignored his agreement with the Yankees ,broke curfew in Texas, stayed late at a strip bar(despite his daily AA agreement) and punched out a taxi driver over a fare.Stupid? Yes.Arrogant? Way over the line.His and Straws drug use kept his teamates from being a special franchise in the late 80's but both had a finger pointed at someone else

[Fuzzy Bear]

i am not an expert, but i think that koufax was below average for several years, until he put it all together and dominated for five or six years in the early and mid-sixties. do not misunderstand me about this, koufax at his best was significantly better than doc at his best. what i AM saying is that doc was one of the best pitchers for six or seven years (out of 13ish) and koufax was stunningly amazing (better than doc) for six or seven seasons (out of 13ish). if you do not agree with me that were doc's numbers exactly the same for the second part of his career as they were for the first, he would be HOF bound, then how does koufax get in if he only dominated for a relatively short amount of time??

(A) Koufax went out on top. He could have still pitched, but doctors told him that if he continued to pitch, over time, his arthritis would get worse to where he would not have been able to straighten his arm. (It's possible that today, his prognosis would not have been as bad, due to advances in sports medicine, and Koufax would have continued to pitch.) Gooden went out on the bottom, AFTER hurting his arm, and getting into problems with substance abuse.

(B) Gooden gets SOME credit for being a star at 19, but it was his undoing in the end. Koufax's early mediocre years were due to a rule that required the Dodgers to keep a pitcher on the roster for two years if he received a signing bonus of such and such amount. Koufax spent age 19 and 20 on the big league roster not really ready for the show, but stuck there because of a rule. Had Koufax come up in 1958, and had he pitched one more year, we would not hear as much carping about his "short" career.

I'm a bit of a fan on this issue, but I love Sandy Koufax. Sandy is the kind of athlete that I wish every athlete were. Quiet. Unassuming. Not attention seeking. Practical and rational, not egomaniacal. (His decision to retire while on top showed uncommon good sense; how many jocks play 2-3 more years and end up cripples at 50?) He was a winner, and he was the main reason the Dodgers won three pennants and two world championships in 4 years in the sixties. He was the best player on the Dodgers, and the best by a lot. If that's not a great player, well . . .

[538280]

While his career value or consistency certainly doesn't stack up, I would not be opposed at all to Gooden in the HOF. I wouldn't endorse him, but if he got in (which he won't, BTW) I would have no problem. Gooden in 1985 had what was IMO the best season a pitcher ever had (check archives for my reasoning). That fact alone, it could be argued, is enough to put him in the HOF. Considering he did have a few other very good years, and spent quite a bit of time as a big leaguer, I could see a case here.

[KCGHOST]

Fuzzy, you must have some time on your hands today.

[Honus Wagner Rules]

I'm of the strong belief that the drugs were NOT the primary reason for Gooden's downfall. It was the blantant overuse from ages 19-23 that destroyed his arm. By age 25 he was a league average pitcher.

[Food]

^I agree with the above.

[baseball junkie]

Gooden in the Hall of Fame -- not a chance.

But here's an idea. A "reality TV" show based around the life of Doc Gooden. They Yanks could give him another chance. He'd be a minor league instructor for a while. He could meet with "King George" every now and then. And then of course sink into another drug induced collapse -- running from the police, trying to score dope, getting high, trying to get sober, failing, repeat.

I'm thinking HBO.

The show would be called "Cracked".

[RedSoxVT92]

Doc Gooden had enormous potential and showed his greatness in his first few years. But the HOF is based on what someone can do over a full career not just potential. Ive been told this many times about Smokey Joe :(

Its sad to see such a great pitcher who could have been one of the best wasted because of drugs.

[538280]

Gooden's ineffectiveness the 2nd half of his career was more due to the Mets' huge overusage of him, not nearly as much about his drug problems. Of course the drugs played some role, but it's been made into far more than it really was. The Mets should have been smarter with their young stud pitcher than to pitch him 200+ innings a year in his late teens and early 20s.

I think many here are being way too hard on Gooden, he had what is IMO the best season by a pitcher ever in 1985, it could be argued that that feat alone is enough to make him a HOFer. Outside of that he had about 5 more solid years and lasted quite a long time in the big leaguers. His rocord is not necessarily that of a HOFer, but it isn't that far away, and add into the fact he had such an awesome season, perhaps the best ever, and I think you have a decent HOF case. I wouldn't be outraged with the idea of Dwight Gooden in the Hall.

[jalbright]

Gooden's ineffectiveness the 2nd half of his career was more due to the Mets' huge overusage of him, not nearly as much about his drug problems. Of course the drugs played some role, but it's been made into far more than it really was. The Mets should have been smarter with their young stud pitcher than to pitch him 200+ innings a year in his late teens and early 20s.

I think many here are being way too hard on Gooden, he had what is IMO the best season by a pitcher ever in 1985, it could be argued that that feat alone is enough to make him a HOFer. Outside of that he had about 5 more solid years and lasted quite a long time in the big leaguers. His rocord is not necessarily that of a HOFer, but it isn't that far away, and add into the fact he had such an awesome season, perhaps the best ever, and I think you have a decent HOF case. I wouldn't be outraged with the idea of Dwight Gooden in the Hall.

I know what you're saying, and on one level, I'm OK with it. But then what about Roger Maris? He had one heck of a season, and without PEDs. And then when I think about all the pitchers I'd hear arguments about having "similar" careers to Gooden and therefore they belong in the Hall (and don't think a couple of them wouldn't slither in to join Haines and Marquard), I blanch at the mere idea of Gooden in the Hall. I have to draw the line above him and staunchly defend that line against the likes of him.

Jim Albright

[Gee Walker]

Maybe Doc Gooden and Denny McLain can go in together... with their parole officers.

Both of them were great pitchers at very young ages. Both looked like they were bound for the Hall of Fame in their early twenties. Both were the staff aces of World Champion teams. And, unfortunately, both of them will be most remembered for not fulfilling their early promise, and for being serious law-breakers after their baseball careers are over.

Eddie Cicotte will make the Hall of Fame before Doc Gooden does - and I don't expect him there soon - mainly because there is virtually nobody alive today who remembers seeing Cicotte pitch, while every adult remembers Doc in the mid-80's, and what he did afterwards.

[538280]

I know what you're saying, and on one level, I'm OK with it. But then what about Roger Maris? He had one heck of a season, and without PEDs.

Did Roger Maris have the best hitting season of all time, or anything close to it? No, he hit the most HRs, that doesn't make that season even near the level of probably at least 50 other seasons that have came before it. If I were to rank the top 100 offensive seasons of all time by a formal methology, I doubt Roger Maris 1961 would make it. He hit 61 HRs, but his BA was relatively low vs. other all time great seasons, his OBP was nothing to write home about, and neither was his slugging because of the low BA and he hit very few doubles. Gooden's 1985 was a truly amazing pitching season, and has to be mentioned with the best single seasons of all time. Certainly it has just as good an argument as any other as the best single season ever. The same cannot be said for Roger Maris, his season did not have nearly the same impact.

And then when I think about all the pitchers I'd hear arguments about having "similar" careers to Gooden and therefore they belong in the Hall (and don't think a couple of them wouldn't slither in to join Haines and Marquard), I blanch at the mere idea of Gooden in the Hall. I have to draw the line above him and staunchly defend that line against the likes of him.

What other pitcher has a career like Gooden? What other pitcher came up at 19 and 20, had a few very, very good seasons and one that may be the best ever, and then the rest of their career wasn't all that much. I can't really think of any other pitchers like that. A few others may have had one great season and only one or two other ones, but none have the great season nearly as great as Gooden's was.

[jalbright]

Did Roger Maris have the best hitting season of all time, or anything close to it? No, he hit the most HRs, that doesn't make that season even near the level of probably at least 50 other seasons that have came before it. If I were to rank the top 100 offensive seasons of all time by a formal methology, I doubt Roger Maris 1961 would make it. He hit 61 HRs, but his BA was relatively low vs. other all time great seasons, his OBP was nothing to write home about, and neither was his slugging because of the low BA and he hit very few doubles. Gooden's 1985 was a truly amazing pitching season, and has to be mentioned with the best single seasons of all time. Certainly it has just as good an argument as any other as the best single season ever. The same cannot be said for Roger Maris, his season did not have nearly the same impact.



What other pitcher has a career like Gooden? What other pitcher came up at 19 and 20, had a few very, very good seasons and one that may be the best ever, and then the rest of their career wasn't all that much. I can't really think of any other pitchers like that. A few others may have had one great season and only one or two other ones, but none have the great season nearly as great as Gooden's was.

The point is not that you or I would buy or make these arguments, nor even that the average fan will. However, remember who's voting and don't forget they're susceptible to the lowest common denominator argument (If George Kelly is in, then so should the butcher, the baker and the candlestick maker and about 80 others). Realize that if Gooden got in, some would try to piggyback their favorite unworthies to Doc's career marks because those marks would be such an inviting target for that crowd. Thanks, but no thanks. Besides, in my book, nobody earns HOF status on as few excellent seasons as Gooden.

Also, though I agree that Gooden was overused early in his career and his career paid for it, that's hardly a unique circumstance in baseball history. It wouldn't take long to amass a heck of a list of guys who were darned good for a short time but flamed out due to overuse. I'm simply not interested in going there.

Jim Albright

[Old Mike]

Well, a good comparison is Wes Ferrell since he and Gooden ended their careers with similar won-lost totals and ERA+. Ferrell was similarily overused but I don't see, after adjusting for the timeline, that Gooden sustained his dominance as long as Ferrell did. Ferrell started off with 4 straight 20 wins seasons. He was probably the best pitcher in baseball in 1930 and his 1929 and 1930 seasons are easily the equal of Gooden's first two. Ferrell also has the extra value of being baseball's greatest hitting pitcher and his early flameout was due to leading the major leagues in innings and complete games from 1935 to 1937, and not from ingesting or snorting foreign substances.

I can't see how anyone could expect Gooden to go into the HOF before Ferrell.

[KCGHOST]

Is anyone fired up to elect Saberhagen to the HoF?? He had much the better quality career than Gooden. Any way you want to slice the pie he was better. More CYA's, better K/BB ratio, better NWL, better RCAA, and better DERA. After Gooden's fourth year he was just a guy and only his 2nd year was stellar.

[yankillaz]

Sorry, it's not happening.

Gooden was awesome at the beginning of his career, sure... but after 1987 (when he was all of 22 years old), he NEVER had a qualifying season with an ERA+ better than 114. Not one. At all.

You're flat out wrong on him having 13 seasons with an ERA 0.90 less than league average... he had TWO such seasons, 1984 and 1985... and that's it. He never did it again (except 1998, when he didn't pitch enough innings to qualify).

He's 111th among pitchers in grey ink. He was never in the top 10 in W, ERA, or K rate after 1991... when he was 26.

Sorry, buddy. Doc was a great pitcher. But when your career is effectively over by age 26... you're not going to the Hall.

Count me in EH. Too bad for him... :ughh

[Cougar]

Is anyone fired up to elect Saberhagen to the HoF?? He had much the better quality career than Gooden. Any way you want to slice the pie he was better. More CYA's, better K/BB ratio, better NWL, better RCAA, and better DERA. After Gooden's fourth year he was just a guy and only his 2nd year was stellar.

Good point. Only Saberhagen and Denny McLain have multiple Cy's and no realistic Hall prospects.

[125osprey]

Gooden? Not a chance. It's too bad, though. For a short time, at the start of his career, he seemed destined to be one of the all-time greats. What a waste.

[jalbright]

What other pitcher has a career like Gooden? What other pitcher came up at 19 and 20, had a few very, very good seasons and one that may be the best ever, and then the rest of their career wasn't all that much. I can't really think of any other pitchers like that. A few others may have had one great season and only one or two other ones, but none have the great season nearly as great as Gooden's was.

You're putting too many qualifiers on it. However, there are a number of pitchers who had one or two dominant years and wound up with careers which one might argue compare to Gooden. Let's start with guys not in the Hall and not active and have at least had a few years on the BBWAA ballot. For the big season, let's require that the guy was the best pitcher in his league in a year (after 1900) by at least five win shares (Gooden won by six in 1985) and beat Gooden's career win shares (187). Guys who meet those criteria are Al Orth (big year 1906, 243 win shares), Dolf Luque (1923, 241 win shares, none of which counts his Cuban play), George Uhle (1926, 231 win shares), Lon Warneke (1931, 220 win shares), Wes Ferrell (1935, 233 win shares), Bucky Walters (1938, 251 win shares) and Bret Saberhagen (1989, 193 win shares). If Gooden gets in, all these guys have a) essentially the same case and b) more career win shares--so shouldn't they all go, too? Even if Gooden's one year is much better than all these guys' big years, with the exception of Saberhagen, they all have him by at least 33 career win shares to compensate. Maybe some deserve it, maybe not, but if the line is below Gooden, I think it's tough to exclude these guys--and I don't want to put all of them in.

Jim Albright

[538280]

You're putting too many qualifiers on it. However, there are a number of pitchers who had one or two dominant years and wound up with careers which one might argue compare to Gooden. Let's start with guys not in the Hall and not active and have at least had a few years on the BBWAA ballot. For the big season, let's require that the guy was the best pitcher in his league in a year (after 1900) by at least five win shares (Gooden won by six in 1985) and beat Gooden's career win shares (187). Guys who meet those criteria are Al Orth (big year 1906, 243 win shares), Dolf Luque (1923, 241 win shares, none of which counts his Cuban play), George Uhle (1926, 231 win shares), Lon Warneke (1931, 220 win shares), Wes Ferrell (1935, 233 win shares), Bucky Walters (1938, 251 win shares) and Bret Saberhagen (1989, 193 win shares). If Gooden gets in, all these guys have a) essentially the same case and b) more career win shares--so shouldn't they all go, too? Even if Gooden's one year is much better than all these guys' big years, with the exception of Saberhagen, they all have him by at least 33 career win shares to compensate. Maybe some deserve it, maybe not, but if the line is below Gooden, I think it's tough to exclude these guys--and I don't want to put all of them in.

Jim Albright

I wouldn't want to put them in either. Your comparisons are valid, but they miss the whole crux of my argument, which is basically that a case could be made that a guy with the best pitching season of all time should be in the HOF, pretty much regardless of what else he accomplished.

I don't really buy that, and I don't think Gooden should really be in the Hall, BTW, but I can see how someone could take that logic and make a good case for Gooden going in.

[jalbright]

Chris,

If that's the argument, I find it hard to put Gooden's superb 1985 over Carlton's 1972 for an otherwise abysmal Phillie team for at least one. I don't buy that argument, and even if that limited argument worked for Gooden, somebody would be using Gooden to compare to the cases I listed, and probably some others, which is my point.

Jim Albright

[digglahhh]

Chris,

If that's the argument, I find it hard to put Gooden's superb 1985 over Carlton's 1972 for an otherwise abysmal Phillie team for at least one. I don't buy that argument, and even if that limited argument worked for Gooden, somebody would be using Gooden to compare to the cases I listed, and probably some others, which is my point.

Jim Albright

I'm with you Jim.

When thinking about boderline, or below even that for Gooden, HOFers, one of the often neglected considerations is precedent. What slippery slope will the induction of player X help to further. Even if I thought Gooden was a coin flip, I would have to come down on the "no" side for the reasons that Jim articulates.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Is anyone fired up to elect Saberhagen to the HoF?? He had much the better quality career than Gooden. Any way you want to slice the pie he was better. More CYA's, better K/BB ratio, better NWL, better RCAA, and better DERA. After Gooden's fourth year he was just a guy and only his 2nd year was stellar.

Although this is not obvous to many people, I agree with this sentiment. Saberhagen had a much higher peak than Gooden. If Saberhagen had 2 more big seasons, and had limped to 200 wins, he would be an outside shot HOF candidate. His ERA vs. league is MUCH better than Gooden's.

That's a coulda, shoulda, woulda, though. I'd put Ron Guidry in the HOF before Sabes.

[STLCards2]

Is anyone fired up to elect Saberhagen to the HoF?? He had much the better quality career than Gooden. Any way you want to slice the pie he was better. More CYA's, better K/BB ratio, better NWL, better RCAA, and better DERA. After Gooden's fourth year he was just a guy and only his 2nd year was stellar.

I wouldn't suppoirt either's selection, but Saberhagen is the better pick. I agree completely.

[Nowbatting7]

Ron Guidry had a career similar to Doc’s but Guidry had a higher winning percentage, a lower ERA, and, in fewer games pitched, more shutouts, and more complete games. Doesn’t look like Louisiana Lightning is going into the HOF. Gooden doesn’t have a chance.