Luis Tiant?

[AG2004]

Originally Posted by keepthefaith3

Sorry, I wasn't really paying attention writing that (post thirty). Edited.

And your edited version still has the same problem. According to your second answer, the following Hall of Famers are all better than Tiant: Steve Carlton, Ferguson Jenkins, Phil Niekro, Jim Palmer, Gaylord Perry, Nolan Ryan, Tom Seaver, and Don Sutton. Yet your first answer places Tiant at number five among his contemporaries, which means he should be better than at least four of those eight Hall of Famers. Those two answers still contradict each other.

So, in your opinion, which of those eight Hall of Famers were worse than Tiant? If they were all better than Tiant, then the best Tiant could be is number nine.

[The Kid]

who thinks luis belongs? He's got almost identical numbers to catfish hunter, and was one of the most exciting atheletes during th 70's.

[Fuzzy Bear]

I would support Tiant. I would say, however, that Blyleven, Kaat, and John are ahead of him in line.

[leecemark]

--Maybe . He wouldn't be the worst in, but he isn't the best not in either.

[rsuriyop]

Originally Posted by keepthefaith3

who thinks luis belongs? He's got almost identical numbers to catfish hunter, and was one of the most exciting atheletes during th 70's.

He's one of those players who I wouldn't mind getting in or not. But I can certainly tell you that he was much better than Catfish Hunter.

[538280]

Originally Posted by rsuriyop

He's one of those players who I wouldn't mind getting in or not. But I can certainly tell you that he was much better than Catfish Hunter.

I agree with this completely.

[Fuzzy Bear]

I've not had a problem with Catfish Hunter as a HOFer, and Tiant is comparable. They're the same type of pitcher, control guys, who had arm troubles. If Hunter AND Drysdale are in, then why not Tiant? Of course, if Blyleven, John, and Kaat aren't in, then why Tiant?

I certainly rate Tiant ahead of Jack Morris.

[KCGHOST]

Tiant just doesn't measure up to me even though he had a better career than Catfish (to me a mistake). Too many guys who had better careers are in line ahead of him.

[Paolo]

He belongs for sure.

[STLCards2]

I have a total of 77 retired pitchers, Negro League pitchers and current pitchers who I have in my HOF status right now. Tiant is #69 out of the 77. Just at the bottom, but there. (Hunter is # 84, and I could easily see myself moving him down before up.)

[Yankwood]

Well, first of all, Luis Tiant was NOT superior to Catfish, which is evidenced by the fact that Hunter had 7 consecutive years of being one of the 3 or 4 best pitchers in the league. Let's remember that Koufax only had 6 and the most Tiant could come up with consecutively was 5. Previous to that he had 3 injury riddled seasons which was preceded by a great year. Catfish did it more consistently and consecutively. I think this also stays in voter's minds. I don't want to turn this into a Jim Hunter thread but I just wanted to say that making the statement that Tiant was superior is erroneous. Comparable, yes, to be fair but better-no.

[The Kid]

I don't want to turn this into a Jim Hunter thread but I just wanted to say that making the statement that Tiant was superior is erroneous. Comparable, yes, to be fair but better-no.[/quote]

I never said Tiant was better. I just think he belongs.

[EvanAparra]

Originally Posted by Yankwood

Well, first of all, Luis Tiant was NOT superior to Catfish, which is evidenced by the fact that Hunter had 7 consecutive years of being one of the 3 or 4 best pitchers in the league. Let's remember that Koufax only had 6 and the most Tiant could come up with consecutively was 5. Previous to that he had 3 injury riddled seasons which was preceded by a great year. Catfish did it more consistently and consecutively. I think this also stays in voter's minds. I don't want to turn this into a Jim Hunter thread but I just wanted to say that making the statement that Tiant was superior is erroneous. Comparable, yes, to be fair but better-no.

Yeah, Catfish was better than Koufax.

[Dalkowski110]

I honestly don't like the "If-Catfish-Then-Luis" argument, but then again, I hate the "If-One-Then" argument, as Bill James terms it, and am full agreement with him about it. That said, I wouldn't mind Tiant in the Hall of Fame. He's not just better than one guy in the Hall, and certainly pitched to deserve it. That said, Jim Kaat, Bert Blyleven, and Tommy John are equally deserving of the Hall. Jack Morris is not.

[NewYork NewYork]

I think he has a good case, but I also think there are other guys not in who have had better careers than him.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Originally Posted by Yankwood

Well, first of all, Luis Tiant was NOT superior to Catfish, which is evidenced by the fact that Hunter had 7 consecutive years of being one of the 3 or 4 best pitchers in the league. Let's remember that Koufax only had 6 and the most Tiant could come up with consecutively was 5. Previous to that he had 3 injury riddled seasons which was preceded by a great year. Catfish did it more consistently and consecutively. I think this also stays in voter's minds. I don't want to turn this into a Jim Hunter thread but I just wanted to say that making the statement that Tiant was superior is erroneous. Comparable, yes, to be fair but better-no.

Is it really more valuable to accomplish what you accomplish in consecutive seasons?

Tiant's career is far more truncated than Hunter's. On the other hand, Tiant pitched longer, while Hunter was done at 33.

[leecemark]

--I think there is some value in having a consecutive prime. It isn't required to get my support and it won't overcome a big difference in career accomplishments, but if two guys are close I'll favor the one who packed his big years together. Even moreso, a guy who has the same accomplishments in a shorter career trumps one who took longer to get there.

[dgarza]

Hunter is a borderline HOFer, and the main reason he makes it is the "Fame" aspect. Without that, Tiant vs. Hunter becomes not "If Hunter, then Tiant," but "If not Tiant, then not Hunter."

[Yankwood]

Originally Posted by Fuzzy Bear

Is it really more valuable to accomplish what you accomplish in consecutive seasons?

Tiant's career is far more truncated than Hunter's. On the other hand, Tiant pitched longer, while Hunter was done at 33.

My statement referred as much to the voters perception as anything. I think a player remains in fans and writers minds when they can do it consecutively. A boxing analogy would be 7 straight right hooks to the head does more damage than the same punches would do over a longer timespan. Plus the fact that Catfish had postseason exposure on his side. So, no, I didn't mean it as to say that Catfish was better than Koufax like someone else pointed out but these threads are a bit "Koufaxed" out by now.

[Sliding Billy]

Originally Posted by Yankwood

Well, first of all, Luis Tiant was NOT superior to Catfish, which is evidenced by the fact that Hunter had 7 consecutive years of being one of the 3 or 4 best pitchers in the league. Let's remember that Koufax only had 6 and the most Tiant could come up with consecutively was 5. Previous to that he had 3 injury riddled seasons which was preceded by a great year. Catfish did it more consistently and consecutively. I think this also stays in voter's minds. I don't want to turn this into a Jim Hunter thread but I just wanted to say that making the statement that Tiant was superior is erroneous. Comparable, yes, to be fair but better-no.

Comparing their career totals and rate stats, they are very close, almost indiscernable, with perhaps a slight edge for Hunter. However, when you look at the context of their performance, Tiant clearly contributes far more to his teams' wins:

The league ERA during Hunter's run was 3.76, during Tiant's 3.39. Moreover, Hunter pitched for better teams in parks that favored pitchers more. Tiant finished in the top ten in park-adjusted ERA 7 times, twice leading the league, Hunter 3 times, leading the league once. Hunter's run as a premier pitcher was five consecutive years, rather than seven, as in the first and last his ERA was above league. Hunter was a fine pitcher whose won-lost record benefited from his playing on great teams. But Tiant was superior.

[The Kid]

Tiant had almost identical numbers to another HOFer, Don Drysdale

[AG2004]

After making a Keltner List for Tiant, I just don't see him as a Hall of Famer.

Case to Consider: TIANT, Luis

1. Was he ever regarded as the best player in baseball? Did anybody, while he was active, ever suggest that he was the best player in baseball?

No.

2. Was he the best player on his team?

He was Cleveland’s best pitcher in 1967 and 1968, and Boston’s best in 1972, 1974, and 1976, according to win shares.

3. Was he the best player in baseball at his position? Was he the best player in the league at his position?

He never led AL pitchers in win shares, but he was second among major leaguer pitchers in 1974 and third in 1968.

4. Did he have an impact on a number of pennant races?

Some. He had 19 win shares in 1972, but Boston lost the division by half a game. He also won the final scheduled regular-season game in 1978, setting up the playoff against the Yankees. Finally, he pitched a complete-game win against Oakland in the 1975 ALCS, and didn’t give up an earned run (Oakland’s sole run came due to two errors).

5. Was he good enough that he could play regularly after passing his prime?

Yes.

6. Is he the very best baseball player in history who is not in the Hall of Fame?

No.

7. Are most players who have comparable statistics in the Hall of Fame?

By similarity scores: Catfish Hunter, Jim Bunning, Billy Pierce, Vida Blue, Mickey Lolich, Don Drysdale, Jim Perry, Kevin Brown, Hooks Dauss, Orel Hershiser. Three are in Cooperstown; two are in the BBFHOF.

Career win shares, contemporary pitchers: Jim Kaat 268, Juan Marichal 263, TIANT 256. Tiant is on the low side.

Win shares, peak three seasons: Tom Seaver 88, Jim Palmer 88, Phil Niekro 86, Catfish Hunter 80, TIANT 79, Vida Blue 77, Mickey Lolich 75, Bert Blyleven 75, Nolan Ryan 74, Jim Kaat 70, Don Sutton 69. Tiant is around the cut-off line.

Best five consecutive seasons: Phil Niekro 118, Catfish Hunter 117, Bert Blyleven 114, Steve Carlton 111, Mickey Lolich 111, TIANT 108, Nolan Ryan 102, Don Sutton 99. Again, Tiant is in the cut-off area, but he’s a little on the low side this time.

8. Do the player's numbers meet Hall of Fame standards?

Tiant’s black ink score of 13 is 161st overall. That’s not very good. He’s 164th in gray ink at 115 points, which is even worse. However, his HOF Standards score of 41.0, which puts him at number 65 on that list, is borderline.

9. Is there any evidence to suggest that the player was significantly better or worse than is suggested by his statistics?

Not really. Fenway Park was a hitter’s park; however, he started in Cleveland during the 1960s, a pitcher’s era.

10. Is he the best player at his position who is eligible for the Hall of Fame?

No.

11. How many MVP-type seasons did he have? Did he ever win an MVP award? If not, how many times was he close?

Tiant was fifth in the 1968 MVP voting. He finished fourth in the Cy Young voting in 1974, and fifth in 1976. He finished second among AL pitchers in win shares twice.

12. How many All-Star-type seasons did he have? How many All-Star games did he play in? Did most of the players who played in this many All-Star games go into the Hall of Fame?

Tiant was in three All-Star games, which is low for a pitcher. Tiant was among the AL’s top five pitchers in win shares just three times, and was in a tie for seventh two other years. However, three All-Star-type seasons is still low for a pitcher.

13. If this man were the best player on his team, would it be likely that the team could win the pennant?

I doubt that a team could win a pennant if Tiant was its best pitcher; he was just too inconsistent.

14. What impact did the player have on baseball history? Was he responsible for any rule changes? Did he introduce any new equipment? Did he change the game in any way?

Not that I know of.

15. Did the player uphold the standards of sportsmanship and character that the Hall of Fame, in its written guidelines, instructs us to consider?

As far as I can tell.

CONCLUSION: Tiant does not belong in the Hall of Fame.

[The Kid]

Originally Posted by AG2004

9. Is there any evidence to suggest that the player was significantly better or worse than is suggested by his statistics?

Not really. Fenway Park was a hitter’s park; however, he started in Cleveland during the 1960s, a pitcher’s era.

Remember that he played most of his career in the 70's and had his best year in 1968

[The Kid]

Six reasons Luis should be in the hall:

1. Better winning % then: Rube Marquad, Don Drysdale, Fergie Jenkins, Pud Galvin, Eppa Rixey, Nolan Ryan, Don Sutton, Burlieg Grimes, Red Faber; all HOFers

2. Lower ERA then:

Lefty Gomez, Jesse Haines, Waite Hoyt, Ted Lyons, Phil Niekro, Herb Hennock, Robin Roberts, Red Ruffing, Early Wynn; all HOFers

3. Won twenty games three times in eight years

4. 49 shutouts

5. Incredible 1975 World Series

6. Four striaght shutouts in 1968

Loo-e, Loo-e, Loo-e!

[AG2004]

Originally Posted by keepthefaith3

Six reasons Luis should be in the hall:

1. Better winning % then: Rube Marquad, Don Drysdale, Fergie Jenkins, Pud Galvin, Eppa Rixey, Nolan Ryan, Don Sutton, Burlieg Grimes, Red Faber; all HOFers

2. Lower ERA then:

Lefty Gomez, Jesse Haines, Waite Hoyt, Ted Lyons, Phil Niekro, Herb Pennock, Robin Roberts, Red Ruffing, Early Wynn; all HOFers

3. Won twenty games three times in eight years

So far, we haven't ruled out Deacon Phillippe, who had a better winning % than Luis Tiant, a better ERA+ than Luis Tiant, and who won twenty games six times in seven years. Hippo Vaughn has a better winning % and a better ERA+ than Tiant; he also won twenty games five times in six years. Lon Warneke does better than Tiant in winning % and ERA+. Warneke won twenty games three times, but he managed to do it in four years. So far, we haven't seen what's special about Tiant.

That eight-year period for Tiant also includes a stint in the minors, by the way.

4. 49 shutouts

Well, Bert Blyleven has 60 shutouts, and he's not in the Hall of Fame. Blyleven's ninth in shutouts; he's the only pitcher in the top twenty who's not in Cooperstown, and he's the only pitcher with at least 50 shutouts who's not in Cooperstown.

But 49 shutouts isn't that far ahead of a lot of other pitchers who aren't in Cooperstown. Jack Powell has 46, Doc White 45, Babe Adams 44, Milt Pappas 43, Bucky Walters 42, and Hippo Vaughn 41.

5. Incredible 1975 World Series

3 games, 2-0 with a 3.60 ERA.

Hippo Vaughn did an incredible job on the mound in the 1918 World Series, pitching three complete games with a 1.00 ERA. He went 1-2, but that's because the Cubs' batting was lousy; the two losses were by scores of 1-0 and 2-1. Lon Warneke went 2-0 in the 1935 Series with a 0.53 ERA.

Babe Adams went 3-0 with a 1.33 ERA and one shutout in the 1909 World Series. It's a shame he only had the two 20-win seasons, or he'd be right up there with Tiant, as he also went down to the minors in mid-career.

So far, we don't have a lot to separate Tiant from a lot of people who aren't in the Hall of Fame.

6. Four striaght shutouts in 1968

Loo-e, Loo-e, Loo-e!

Doc White threw five straight shutouts in 1904. Sometimes you get lucky.

Keepthefaith, I have several questions that I'd like to see you answer.

1) Among his contemporaries, where do you rank Tiant?

2) How many pitchers in Cooperstown were worse than Tiant? Who were they? Are those pitchers regarded as mistakes?

3) How many pitchers who meet the Hall of Fame's eligibility requirements, but are not yet in, are better than Tiant? Who are they?

4) Is there any method you like to use to help determine whether someone ought to be a Hall of Famer? If so, what is it?