When Did Greg Maddux Become A HOFer To You?

[dgarza]

After the completion of which season could you say to yourself "Greg Maddux could retire today and I'd support him for the Hall of Fame"?

[OleMissCub]

If someone votes for the first option we should get an old west lynch mob together. I'll supply the rope for the posse.

[Captain Cold Nose]

If someone votes for the first option we should get an old west lynch mob together. I'll supply the rope for the posse.

The second one isn't so great, either.

[The Splendid Splinter]

The second one isn't so great, either.

or the last one...

[Captain Cold Nose]

or the last one...

It's an honest answer at least, even though it's a wrong one. If anyone says they knew Maddux was a HOF'er when he first took the mound, they're lying.

[Brian McKenna]

I'm from an AL town but I knew relatively early that Maddux was truely elite. I've followed nearly every one of his starts since at least the second Cy Young season. By the fourth in a row, the writing was on the wall.

Who would have known then that Clemens would have "revived" himself for an unprecedented post age 35 run? Despite that resurrection, I always thought Maddux was the better pitcher simply for what he didn't possess - the overwhelming fastball.

To me, Maddux is the #1 pitcher of all-time (I give him the bump over Johnson because of the difficulty pitching in this era) and it's one of the pluses of my time watching the game that I gravitated to him early and caught as many games as I could on TBS and drove up to Philly when I could to see him pitch.

I spent a week in Atlanta years ago on business - boy was I pissed that the Braves just happened to be out of town the entire time.

[Brian McKenna]

If anyone says they knew Maddux was a HOF'er when he first took the mound, they're lying.

Yeah - even Mama Maddux was only half right in her predictions.

[Captain Cold Nose]

I'm from an AL town but I knew relatively early that Maddux was truely elite. I've followed nearly every one of his starts since at least the second Cy Young season. By the fourth in a row, the writing was on the wall.

Who would have known then that Clemens would have "revived" himself for an unprecedented post age 35 run? Despite that resurrection, I always thought Maddux was the better pitcher simply for what he didn't possess - the overwhelming fastball.

To me, Maddux is the #1 pitcher of all-time (I give him the bump over Johnson because of the difficulty pitching in this era) and it's one of the pluses of my time watching the game that I gravitated to him early and caught as many games as I could on TBS and drove up to Philly when I could to see him pitch.

I spent a week in Atlanta years ago on business - boy was I pissed that the Braves just happened to be out of town the entire time.

I've been lucky enough to catch him in Florida while on vacation a few years back, as well as his Cubs redebut (a word?) in Cincinnati a couple years ago. He didn't fare too well, and was flat out shelled in the first game. That's it from seeing him in person, sorry to say.

Maddux's emergence (the four consecutive CYAs) on top of the apparent decline at the time for Clemens has him as clearly the best pitcher in all of baseball at the time. The only thing that kept him from being a HOF'er in my mind was I don't think 10 years is enough. Once he got a couple more seasons under his belt, he was unquestioned first ballot. It wouldn't have mattered how poor he pitched those seasons, which he did not.

[Honus Wagner Rules]

During the middle of Maddux's Cy Young run was i knew he was a HoFer. It was simply a pleasure to watch him pitch at that time. He was so efficient. It seemed every ground ball was to the shortstop.

[KCGHOST]

Probably when he finished his CYA run (1995) I decided he was an HoFer. In truth, he probably needed to 2001 to rack up the career numbers to cement his induction.

[J W]

1995, the year he became eligible with 10 seasons played. He had just 150 wins, but four straight Cy Young awards put him in Koufax territory even then.

[dgarza]

I'm going to say 1994 was the year he crossed over into borderline-HOF territory (he was skyrocketing and already had 3 straight CYAs)
1995 solidified everything.

[Brooklyn]

I'm going to say 1994 was the year he crossed over into borderline-HOF territory (he was skyrocketing and already had 3 straight CYAs)
1995 solidified everything.

1995 seems to be the popular vote early on. I'd agree that by the end of 1985, there was not doubt in my mind he would be a HOFer by the time he retired.

But the question was, "Greg Maddux could retire today and I'd support him for the Hall of Fame". At the end of 1995, he was 150-93 and had thrown 2,120 innings. Would people really have supported him if he retired after 1995? I think he would have been an interesting debate, but despite the 4 Cy Youngs, I think I would have still voted no - his counting stats were just too low.

I voted 2002, when he crossed 270 wins, which in retrospect may be a little late. 240 wins and 3,000+ innings after 2000 would have in all likelihood gotten my vote had he retired then.

[fenrir]

After 1995 I knew I was watching one of the alltime greats. 4 straight cyyoung awards, two straight seasons with an ERA below 2.00, that's eye popping dominance right there. I should also point out that both seasons where maddux had an ERA below 2.00 he led his league in innings pitched and complete games.

[J W]

Absolutely, I would say if Maddux had a career-ending injury after 1995 he was a HOFer. I would simply point to Sandy Koufax: 165-87, 3 CYA, comparable ERA+. Of course people would point to Koufax's postseason dominance... although Maddux would be fresh off Atlanta's championship season.

[dgarza]

I should also point out that both seasons where maddux had an ERA below 2.00 he led his league in innings pitched and complete games.
Interesting... in 1995 Maddux wasn't even in the top 10 in Games Started, yet he lead in so many categories, which shows how efficient he was!

[philkid3]

I started becoming a serious baseball fan in 1998 (guess why) and by that point I already knew Maddux was a Hall of Famer. By 1999 I knew enough to think Maddux should have been on the All-Century team.

I said '97.

[ElHalo]

I'd go with 2004, when he got to 300 wins.

When he first got traded to the Braves, I thought of him as kind of a third wheel to Smoltz and Glavine, neither of whom really impressed me all that much. I never really thought much of him the next few years (being an AL fan, I still believe I've never actually seen him pitch a single game other than in the 96 and 99 WS), but I do recall hearing on some news broadcast that the Braves pickup of Denny Neagle in 1996 was being compared to their pickup of Greg Maddux, and so for that reason I've always considered him and Denny Neagle together in my mind, and, not having been impressed by Denny Neagle, never thought much of Maddux either. When he got to 300 wins, then I knew he'd hit the automatic HoF number and would be inducted.

[Honus Wagner Rules]

I'd go with 2004, when he got to 300 wins.

When he first got traded to the Braves, I thought of him as kind of a third wheel to Smoltz and Glavine, neither of whom really impressed me all that much. I never really thought much of him the next few years (being an AL fan, I still believe I've never actually seen him pitch a single game other than in the 96 and 99 WS), but I do recall hearing on some news broadcast that the Braves pickup of Denny Neagle in 1996 was being compared to their pickup of Greg Maddux, and so for that reason I've always considered him and Denny Neagle together in my mind, and, not having been impressed by Denny Neagle, never thought much of Maddux either. When he got to 300 wins, then I knew he'd hit the automatic HoF number and would be inducted.
ElHalo,

After all these years I've finally realized that you like to pull our legs. :rofl:

[RuthMayBond]

I'd go with 2004, when he got to 300 wins.

When he first got traded to the Braves, I thought of him as kind of a third wheel to Smoltz and Glavine, neither of whom really impressed me all that much. I never really thought much of him the next few years (being an AL fan, I still believe I've never actually seen him pitch a single game other than in the 96 and 99 WS), but I do recall hearing on some news broadcastbecause that is the ultimate authority

< that the Braves pickup of Denny Neagle in 1996 was being compared to their pickup of Greg Maddux, and so for that reason I've always considered him and Denny Neagle together in my mind, and, not having been impressed by Denny Neagle, never thought much of Maddux either.>

hard to argue

<When he got to 300 wins, then I knew he'd hit the automatic HoF number and would be inducted.>

So he STILL wasn't as good as Sutton :highfive:

[geezer]

I never put much emphasis on Greg Maddux career until the 2002 season, where he started slow and for the first (and only time) he spent on the DL, and his streak of 15 wins was a little in jeopardy (he finished with 16-6 and second in the NL in ERA), and I was rooting for him to get those 300 wins, because he was still young and even if he had HOF material if he didnt reach those 300 wins, but when he get there, people started to give more props, despite Clemens overshadowing him.

Every retired player or not active last season with 300 Wins is in the Hall of Fame, but I also like to add Greg Maddux's fielding excellence and his ability to walk the fewest batters possible.

[Brian McKenna]

Greg Maddux's fielding excellence and his ability to walk the fewest batters possible.

Maddux's ability to limit base on balls and homers in this era is in my mind remarkable - and a defining mark for others to aspire.

[Calif_Eagle]

I think Maddux is a HOF-er and has been since the 4th Cy Young. One thing hasnt been brought up though that I think deserves at least a little comment and discussion. Maddux was for a long time the beneficiary of what was in my view at least, a VERY generously called Strike Zone. All of us have seen a ton of Braves games on TBS and it seems to me anyway, (admittedly just based on eyeballing it) that back before the umpire strike, Maddux got a lot of low and outside pitches called as strikes for him. Im sure everyone else got those too, but for Maddux calling those pitches strikes plays right to his style.

I'd be curious to see what anyone else thinks about that. He is still an amazing pitcher, as Honus Wagner Rules stated, a ground ball to the shortstop machine, if there ever was one.

[SamtheBravesFan]

I think Maddux is a HOF-er and has been since the 4th Cy Young. One thing hasnt been brought up though that I think deserves at least a little comment and discussion. Maddux was for a long time the beneficiary of what was in my view at least, a VERY generously called Strike Zone. All of us have seen a ton of Braves games on TBS and it seems to me anyway, (admittedly just based on eyeballing it) that back before the umpire strike, Maddux got a lot of low and outside pitches called as strikes for him. Im sure everyone else got those too, but for Maddux calling those pitches strikes plays right to his style.

I'd be curious to see what anyone else thinks about that. He is still an amazing pitcher, as Honus Wagner Rules stated, a ground ball to the shortstop machine, if there ever was one.

That argument has frequently been used in an attempt to discredit him a bit, actually.

[Paul Wendt]

1994
Three straight Cy Youngs and four straight innings crowns.
He had mastered pitching in his time. Compare Bob Gibson 1968.

Yes, if he had never returned to the field after the August stoppage, I would advocate another exemption from the 10-season rule, a la Addie Joss.

Hey, his "Most Similar" batter" thru age 41 is longtime Atlanta Braves pitcher Phil Niekro. And second is Tom Glavine.

[willshad]

Id say after 1998 or so. Its hard to imagine a pitcher getting into the hall with less than 200 wins for their career. Even pedro I dont think was considered an automatic hall of famer til he reached that plateau. Seems like every good pitcher with a low win total and good career won/loss record is compared to Koufax (and to a lesser extent Dean)..but I think Koufax was a unique case, and we wont see another pitcher with that few wins get in the hall again. I mean are we going to start comparing guys like Tim Hudson, Roy osawlt and Johan Santana to Koufax too, once they get to 150 wins? Funny how Glavine didnt get serious consideration til he was very close to 300 wins.

[willshad]

after the 1987 season he was 8-18 with a 5.60 ERA for his career. In 1988 he went 18-8 with a 3.18 ERA, and started his run of 15 win seasons. My question is, why isnt Maddux considered as big a suspect for steroids as Clemens? His improvement was much more extreme than Clemens' was.

[Captain Cold Nose]

Id say after 1998 or so. Its hard to imagine a pitcher getting into the hall with less than 200 wins for their career. Even pedro I dont think was considered an automatic hall of famer til he reached that plateau. Seems like every good pitcher with a low win total and good career won/loss record is compared to Koufax (and to a lesser extent Dean)..but I think Koufax was a unique case, and we wont see another pitcher with that few wins get in the hall again. I mean are we going to start comparing guys like Tim Hudson, Roy osawlt and Johan Santana to Koufax too, once they get to 150 wins? Funny how Glavine didnt get serious consideration til he was very close to 300 wins.

Yet many were proclaiming John Smoltz a lock when he reached 200 wins.

[Captain Cold Nose]

after the 1987 season he was 8-18 with a 5.60 ERA for his career. In 1988 he went 18-8 with a 3.18 ERA, and started his run of 15 win seasons. My question is, why isnt Maddux considered as big a suspect for steroids as Clemens? His improvement was much more extreme than Clemens' was.

Different stages of their career. Maddux was still finding his feet, as so many young pitchers struggle at first. Clemens was injured, then had his MVP winning 1986 and subsequent CYA seasons, went into a decline, then picked it back up again. Quite a difference.

[willshad]

Yet many were proclaiming John Smoltz a lock when he reached 200 wins.

exactly..and when he had 150 nobody talked about him. I think he also gets credit for his closer years. I dont think Smoltz is close to being a hall of fame lock anyway. Id say if he retired now his chances would be 50/50 at best.

[willshad]

Different stages of their career. Maddux was still finding his feet, as so many young pitchers struggle at first. Clemens was injured, then had his MVP winning 1986 and subsequent CYA seasons, went into a decline, then picked it back up again. Quite a difference.

that is wuite a big improvement though. Im surprised Chicago didnt give up on Maddux after the 1987 season. Why was he still in the rotation in 1988 anyway>?

[Captain Cold Nose]

that is wuite a big improvement though. Im surprised Chicago didnt give up on Maddux after the 1987 season. Why was he still in the rotation in 1988 anyway>?

Because they still felt he was going to be a very good pitcher, understood full well that pitchers do have bad seasons, and didn't have many other options.

Besides, steroids were not really considered an issue in baseball in the late 80's. Timing is everything. Hindsight is 20/20.

[Brooklyn]

that is wuite a big improvement though. Im surprised Chicago didnt give up on Maddux after the 1987 season. Why was he still in the rotation in 1988 anyway>?


As Captain said, because they didn't have many other options. Ed Lynch started 8 games for the 1987 Cubs. a young Jamie Moyer was 12-15 with a post 5.00 ERA. It wasn't like he was tyring to break into the rotation of the 1971 Orioles - other than Sutcliffe, they didn't really have another dependable starting pitcher in the rotation.

It is common for teams to let young pitchers take a few seasons to find themselves, if they think they have the mechanics and "stuff" to succeed. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.

[OleMissCub]

My question is, why isnt Maddux considered as big a suspect for steroids as Clemens? His improvement was much more extreme than Clemens' was.

Are you serious?

There's quite a bit of difference in someone who is 21 years old figuring his style out and someone who is in their late 30's suddenly putting up sub 3 ERA's.

[OleMissCub]

It is common for teams to let young pitchers take a few seasons to find themselves, if they think they have the mechanics and "stuff" to succeed. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.

Correct. Carlos Zambrano was 4-8 his first season. I'm sure glad the Cubs didn't cut him. Glavine was 7-17 with the Braves his first full season.

[dgarza]

Correct. Carlos Zambrano was 4-8 his first season. I'm sure glad the Cubs didn't cut him. Glavine was 7-17 with the Braves his first full season.
Working out the bugs the 1st 1-3 season is not all that unusual. It happens.

Steve Avery went 3-11 his first year.
Frank Viola was 11-25 his 1st 2 years.
Mike Scott went 14-27 is 1st 4 years.

[Honus Wagner Rules]

that is wuite a big improvement though. Im surprised Chicago didnt give up on Maddux after the 1987 season. Why was he still in the rotation in 1988 anyway>?

Why would the Cubs give up on a 21 year old pitcher (his age in 1987) when his minor league performance was quite good? In his time in the minors Maddux started 69 games and was:

35-16, 2.86 ERA, 1.19 WHIP, 19 CG, 8 SHO,

Maddux was 18-20 yeas old in his minor league career. I'm sure it was obvious to the Cubs that Maddux was extremely talented and just needed some time to adjust to the major leagues. It's quite common for players, ever HoF players, to struggle in their initial call up to the majors. In 1994-95 A-Rod hit just .224 over those two seasons. Why didn't the Mariners give up on him?

I checked out Maddux's 1987 season and it was a strange season for him. He pitched well in the first half.

1987
1st half: 5-7, 4.38 ERA
2nd half: 1-7, 8.86 ERA

He was just awful in August and September. For some reason he had just two starts and had a 13.91 ERA in August. In September he made four starts and had a 6.53 ERA. So from April to July Maddux was 6-9 with a 4.88 ERA. I wonder if he was injured in August and September? It seems to me the Cubs thought his August-September was an abberation and saw the April-July performance as the "real" Greg Maddux.

[OleMissCub]

An implication that this guy was a juicer is laughable to me.

http://chronicle.augusta.com/images/headlines/080898/MADDUX.jpg

[ElHalo]

Working out the bugs the 1st 1-3 season is not all that unusual. It happens.

Steve Avery went 3-11 his first year.
Frank Viola was 11-25 his 1st 2 years.
Mike Scott went 14-27 is 1st 4 years.

Red Ruffing was 39-93 his first six seasons. And 234-131 his next 16.

[fenrir]

after the 1987 season he was 8-18 with a 5.60 ERA for his career. In 1988 he went 18-8 with a 3.18 ERA, and started his run of 15 win seasons. My question is, why isnt Maddux considered as big a suspect for steroids as Clemens? His improvement was much more extreme than Clemens' was.

Maddux was in his early 20's...most pitchers struggle at first. it's not uncommon. what is uncommon is someone being on the decline...then suddenly having the best season of his career at age 34...and this all happens when known steroid supplier brain mcnamee starts to train clemens. coincidence? i think not.

[fenrir]

An implication that this guy was a juicer is laughable to me.

http://chronicle.augusta.com/images/headlines/080898/MADDUX.jpg

even if maddux did juice (which i dont believe he ever did) roids wouldn't have benefitted him as much as clemens. clemens is a power pitcher...steroids can add to the velocity of an already great power pitcher like clemens. for a finesse pitcher like maddux it would be more about recovery. it still would be wrong...but not as severe.

[STLCards2]

Id say after 1998 or so. Its hard to imagine a pitcher getting into the hall with less than 200 wins for their career. Even pedro I dont think was considered an automatic hall of famer til he reached that plateau. Seems like every good pitcher with a low win total and good career won/loss record is compared to Koufax (and to a lesser extent Dean)..but I think Koufax was a unique case, and we wont see another pitcher with that few wins get in the hall again. I mean are we going to start comparing guys like Tim Hudson, Roy osawlt and Johan Santana to Koufax too, once they get to 150 wins? Funny how Glavine didnt get serious consideration til he was very close to 300 wins.

HOF whispers started after his second Cy Young in 1998. If you look back at articles when Glavine went to the Mets, many, if not the majority gave him the "Future Hall of Famer" or at least "possible future Hall of Famer" tag already.

Secondly, if Santana gets to 150 wins pitching at the same level the next few years, it would not be redicuolous to compare him with Koufax. It would give Santana 5-6 Cy young calibre seasons. Of course playoff success is a different story.

[Honus Wagner Rules]

even if maddux did juice (which i dont believe he ever did) roids wouldn't have benefitted him as much as clemens. clemens is a power pitcher...steroids can add to the velocity of an already great power pitcher like clemens. for a finesse pitcher like maddux it would be more about recovery. it still would be wrong...but not as severe.

Yes, Maddux's strength as a pitcher has always been his control. Even now in his decline phase he still has great control. In '07 he has just 25 walks in 198.0 IP. Maddux is having a normal decline for a pitcher his age. His Ks rate has significantly declined and he now gives up more than one hit per inning. Maddux's career ERA and ERA+ through age 36 are 2.83 and 145, respectively. Since then he has a 4.11 ERA and 105 ERA+.

[plask_stirlac]

I'm interested if he would've gotten in after 1995, but when he "became" a HOFer to me is after 1999. Not a great year, but another WS trip.

An implication that this guy was a juicer is laughable to me.


I don't believe Maddux had anything to do with PEDs, but after Alex Sanchez, Brian Roberts, and others I can't use (lack of) bulk as an automatic disqualifier. He would benefit from stamina, he always pitched 200 innings and usually many more.

Also, if you need more early disaster seasons that refute steroids: Halladay 2000, Lowe 1997, Liriano 2005 and Kazmir 2004 (super short but bad).

[Los Bravos]

HOF whispers started after his second Cy Young in 1998.That was my perception, too. Notching the 5th 20 win season a couple of years later really helped, too.

I think his case was also bolstered by the 7 year interval between the Cys. When you can dominate over a large spread of time like that, it tends to demonstrate your ability to adjust and to deal with adversity.

As for Maddux (who has benefitted neither from Dianabol or an umpiring corps that mysteriously catered to him and Glavine, apparently exclusively, in some people's minds), the answer to the question is '94. I can't imagine anyone ignoring three consecutive Cy Young Awards. '95 put the icing on the cake.

[2Chance]

I'm glad to respond after the defender of outre' notions.

I don't feel so bad about getting on board this train late; it seems I'm not the only one. I still thought I was later than others, and remember discussing this with Yellowdog, rest his soul, that I would never vote Maddux for the Hall of Fame.

I changed my mind after he hit 300 Wins. This is a stat that is hard to ignore even if every umpire in the league likes you. So that would be what, 2004?

[willshad]

Maddux was in his early 20's...most pitchers struggle at first. it's not uncommon. what is uncommon is someone being on the decline...then suddenly having the best season of his career at age 34...and this all happens when known steroid supplier brain mcnamee starts to train clemens. coincidence? i think not.

what i find strange about the Clemens situation is that his trainer claims he started taking roids during the 1998 season. However, that doesnt explain how he did so well in 1997. Either he must have been taking steroids that season too, or he obviously still had a lot left in the tank.

[philkid3]

Funny how Glavine didnt get serious consideration til he was very close to 300 wins.

I don't know about that, I heard Glavine talked about pretty seriously long before then. Hell, I even remember SI for Kids back when I still glanced through that sometimes saying "everyone talks about Glavine's teammate Gred Maddux, but one day Tom will join Greg in the Hall of Fame," or something to that extent.

[Edgartohof]

I put 1995 as the season. His 1994 season was his best (and quite possibly THE best all-time), but his '95 season showed that it wasn't just a one year fluke! He was pretty much able to put up the same numbers over 400+ innings, during 2 separate seasons! There is no mistaking how great he was.

After '95, he did hit 150 wins, he had 10 seasons, and I believe the best 2 year peak this games ever seen. 4 consecutive Cy Youngs I might add. At that point in time, only Steve Carlton had as many Cy Young awards as he did!

I would have put him in the Hall after 1995 - everything after was gravy (very good gravy I might add).

Really, the only thing he never did was lead the league in SO (though he was 2nd in 1991). Other than that, he pretty much did it all.

[hellborn]

Working out the bugs the 1st 1-3 season is not all that unusual. It happens.

Steve Avery went 3-11 his first year.
Frank Viola was 11-25 his 1st 2 years.
Mike Scott went 14-27 is 1st 4 years.

I agree 100% that a very young pitcher struggling for a few years is absolutely normal, probably to be expected. For a guy as young as Maddux was when he started, just being in the majors is a major accomplishment. Going 18-8 at age 22 is absolutely amazing, and not at all inconsistent with 6-14 at 21.
I must point out that Scott has been under a cloud of sorts since he first broke out, with many baseball people accusing him of cutting the ball. I see it as being just as likely that he just mastered the split and became vastly more effective with that good pitch, but the buzz about Scott cheating never really went away.
You'd think that it would easy to catch a guy who cut the ball consistently, but I read that an opposing team collected several balls that were all cut in the same spot from a game that Nolan Ryan pitched, and the umpires refused to take action. Maybe they should have just sent them to the commish?

[Captain Cold Nose]

I agree 100% that a very young pitcher struggling for a few years is absolutely normal, probably to be expected. For a guy as young as Maddux was when he started, just being in the majors is a major accomplishment. Going 18-8 at age 22 is absolutely amazing, and not at all inconsistent with 6-14 at 21.
I must point out that Scott has been under a cloud of sorts since he first broke out, with many baseball people accusing him of cutting the ball. I see it as being just as likely that he just mastered the split and became vastly more effective with that good pitch, but the buzz about Scott cheating never really went away.
You'd think that it would easy to catch a guy who cut the ball consistently, but I read that an opposing team collected several balls that were all cut in the same spot from a game that Nolan Ryan pitched, and the umpires refused to take action. Maybe they should have just sent them to the commish?

Accroding to one of Nolan Ryan's books, Kings of the Hill, the Astros pitchers would get quite a laugh over the all the buzz, but Ryan did not confirm or deny anything.

[plask_stirlac]

If it took Duke Snider ten years and Kiner 15, was Maddux a lock after 1995? Could the voters see he was more dominant than Snider or Kiner? He'd get in but it would be contested.

I suppose Dean and Joss got in, and fast for Dizzy.

Or am I comparing eras that are too different for voting? (Yeah)

[Frank]

After the 1998 season you knew he was a 100% lock for the HOF,He ended that season with- 202 -career wins,and just came off a run of 7-straight seasons with an ERA under 2.73...

[willshad]

sorry but theres no way in hell he was a hall of famer after 1995. Not with 150 wins and most comparable players by age to be Dave Mcnally and Doc Gooden. if he had a second half of his career similiar to Gooden, or retired young like mcnally i doubt he would have made it.

[Los Bravos]

I don't recall Dave McNally or Dwight Gooden earning four consecutive Cy Young Awards. Like it or not, that matters to many people.

[philkid3]

I don't recall Dave McNally or Dwight Gooden earning four consecutive Cy Young Awards. Like it or not, that matters to many people.

Yup, it's no guarantee, but there was more than a "way in hell" he'd get in after '95.

[bob]

Id say 1995. By 1994 with the cy youngs and the incredible 94 season he had enough to probably sneak in, but after 95 people realised that this guy was consistantly performing (not just a lucky few seasons) and the best pitcher of his generation, and that should get you in the HOF without question.