Mel Harder

[Cowtipper]

Mel Harder went 223-186 with a 3.80 ERA over 20 years in the majors. In that time, he won 15 or more games eight times (in a row), and twenty games twice. A four time All-Star, Harder led the league in ERA in 1933, in walks/9IP in 1935 and adjusted ERA+ in 1933 as well. He is statistically similar to two Hall of Famers: Waite Hoyt and Jesse Haines, the latter of which many consider to be the worst pitcher in the Hall of Fame.

Interestingly, he pitched 13 innings in All Star games, never surrendering a single run. He also had the sixth most wins in the 1930s, behind only Lefty Grove, Carl Hubbell, Red Ruffing, Wes Ferrell and Lefty Gomez.

Harder received votes for the Hall of Fame 13 times, appearing on as many as 25.4% of the ballots at one point.

So, what do you think? Should Mel Harder be in the Hall of Fame?

[SABR Matt]

No...and it's not even close.

Even given the fact that K/BB ratio was low in that era, the dude walked as many as he struck out and posted low ERAs only in seasons when his team had a good defense.

[henrich]

Not close 41st in his era at his position.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Jack Morris has a better case. So does Luis Tiant. Really, so does Mike Cuellar.

Putting Mel Harder in the HOF wouldn't be as good as putting Jerry Koosman in the HOF.

[henrich]

I could probably list 150 pitchers better, but I agree with all of your players named.

[Cougar]

If it weren't for Ted Williams' endorsement -- which I'm sure he was sincere about -- Harder wouldn't even be on the radar.

I think the Indians retired his number, and that's well deserved.

Edit: 1500th post...woo hoo!

[Paul Wendt]

I have heard of him but I can't keep him straight from Ned Garver who I can't keep straight from Ned Garvin.
MelHrdr NedGrvr NedGrvn

Harder deserves better. He should be in there with Paul Derringer and Bobo Newsom. But I would probably go with Derringer and Newsom. They both came through with big seasons when their teams were in the mix, Harder certainly did not. One more good year by Harder, even one more win against the Tigers, and history would include one Ohio Series for the world championship.

[henrich]

Mel Harder is nowhere near Newsome or Derringer IMO. They are separated by 4000 points if memory serves.

[STLCards2]

In defense of Harder:

No, I am not advocating Harder's HOF selection, but:

Harder is in a fairly rare class of guys with nearly 3,500 Ip and an ERA+ over 110 (113). His K/B rate was not horrible during his prime, as he finished in the top 10 in K/BB seven times. He had an excellent BB rate (eight top-10) and was one of the best in his era at preventing homeruns. Harder also spent his whole career on mediocre Indians teams who didn't give him much help on the defensive side of the ball most years. Matt is right, he did see mto get a little support in his best years, but it appears some of his worst years ERA wise could have been better with more defensive support.

I think we might be selling harder a little short. :hide:

[STLCards2]

Jack Morris has a better case. So does Luis Tiant. Really, so does Mike Cuellar.

Putting Mel Harder in the HOF wouldn't be as good as putting Jerry Koosman in the HOF.

Tiant and Koosman are defintiely better - Morris is about the same. We have had it out on Morris before, so no need to rehash it again.

But Cuellar? Cuellar trails Harder by 600 innings and 4 ERA+ and had the luxury of playing 8 years or so with arguably the greatest defensive teams ever assembled. Surely you know how much those Oriole team defenses affected the pitchers.

[Freakshow]

In the Ultimate Quest, Harder finished 11th among candidates from the 1930's, tied with Harlond Clift and Hal Trosky. Such a poor showing in that weak field points to him as a non-candidate. He's not one of the top 100 candidates from MLB, although he did better than Derringer and Newsom who had zero support.

[KCGHOST]

Harder had a very nice career, but let's not get carried away.

[Brad Harris]

Possibly one of the top 100 pitchers of all-time. Possibly.

[BlueBlood]

Possibly one of the top 100 pitchers of all-time. Possibly.

He missed the top 90 under James's Win Share system and had a lower WSPer162 average than all of the guys below him. If he was top 100 then, he's surely been surpassed by the Sabathias, Webbs, Hollidays & Oswalts of the world - all of which have a high enough peak to surpass the bottom feeders on that list despite not having accumulated great career value (yet). I say "no" to even being in the Top 100 and won't end up voting for him in that project currently running.

Anyway, my Hall of Pitchers runs to about sixty, give or take. So it's a "no" for me.

[SABR Matt]

I have Harder around 180th all time...he might move up if I had PBP data and could use my more advanced methods to test whether he was having a positive impact on things like DP rates, doubles etc, but I can't see him getting into the top 100.

Good pitcher...but unremarkably so.

[henrich]

I have Harder around 180th all time...he might move up if I had PBP data and could use my more advanced methods to test whether he was having a positive impact on things like DP rates, doubles etc, but I can't see him getting into the top 100.

Good pitcher...but unremarkably so.

189th all-time for Harder for me, between Harry Brecheen and Howie Pollet scoring 6995 H-Factor.

[chinese home run]

No, not Hall of Fame caliber. It seems Harder would have the dubious distinction of being the only player in MLB history to spend his entire career with only one team for 20 seasons or more and not make the Hall of Fame.

There aren't many who have done that- Mel Ott, Stan Musial, Walter Johnson, Brooks Robinson, and Yaz, to name a few- but it looks like Harder will be on the outside looking in.

[Cougar]

Ed Kranepool came pretty close, and the Last Original Met is nobody's Hall of Famer.

[Mike90]

He had about four Hall of Fame type seasons in his career:
(1933) Pitched 253 innings and led league in ERA (2.95) despite pitching in a hitter park. Strangely, he was only 15-17 pitching for an average team.
(1934) 20-12 with a 2.61 ERA in 255 innings. 16th in MVP voting, 4th among pitchers.
(1935) 22-11 with a 3.29 ERA in 287 innings. 22nd in MVP voting, tied for 8th among pitchers, although 4 pitchers with less innings, less wins, and worse ERAs got more votes than him.
(1936) 17-10 with a 3.83 ERA in 240 innings. 16th in MVP voting, 4th among pitchers.

He was never considered one of the three best pitchers in the AL during any season. His 223 wins and .545 WP% would bring down the Hall average despite pitching most of his career for good teams. I think he had a better career than Haines and Marquard, but those guys should not be enshrined.