Tuesday afternoon, the TV on my office was set with MLB Network for the Hall of Fame announcement of next summer’s inductees. I was certainly pleased that the Hall will have 4 new members later this summer, but it’s still somewhat frustrating to know there could have been as many as three times that number of worthy candidates on the ballot this year. While arguments can be made back and forth on these players, I’d like to focus on three of the starting pitchers who were eligible this season.
Based on their vote totals, it would seem like there is a world of difference between John Smoltz (82.9 % on his first ballot), Curt Schilling (39.2 % on his 3rd), and Mike Mussina (24.6 % on his 2nd). Talking with a coworker, I claimed there is very little difference between the three, and I’d stand by that claim, but also thought it worth a deeper look (since he seems to think I’m out of my mind.)
So starting from the beginning, it will be instructive to compare the pitching record of the three, starting with some of the more traditional stats that voters might use. Mussina, the lowest vote-getter of the three, secured the most wins over his career with 270, outpacing inductee Pedro Martinez, and John Smoltz (with 219 and 213 respectively). Curt Schilling checks in with 216. On the other side of the ledger, Smoltz actually has the most losses of the three at 155, followed by Mussina at 153, and Schilling at 146. All comparable in my view, with the only discernible difference being Mussina’s substantial lead in wins. Smoltz of course adds 154 saves from his 4 years in the Braves bullpen. Not counting his rookie year, Smoltz averaged 14 wins leading up to his lost season in 2000. If we give him 7 wins in 2001, and 14 each from 2002 to 2004 (when he actually won a total of 6 games), his total would rise to 256. Even granting that he might have managed better win totals than that, it would be difficult to make up the difference between he and Mussina.
ERA certainly favors Smoltz (3.33 v. 3.46 for Schilling and 3.68 for Mussina). This however, is misleading as well. As a starter only, Smoltz’s ERA rises to 3.40 – still superior, but definitely closer to Schilling. Comparing the three directly however is not necessarily the best option, since Mussina pitched in a higher run scoring environment for much of his career – pitching against tougher teams in the American League, and in a hitter’s park in Camden Yards for much of his early career. Instead, using ERA+, which adjusts for ballpark, and compares a pitcher to a league average of 100, Mussina grades out much more favorably – 123 against scores of 127 for Schilling and 125 for Smoltz. So while he still trails, the Moose is much closer to his counterparts.
Sticking to raw numbers which tend to spark the interests of voters, Mussina was the only one of the three not to break the 3000 Strike Out mark – notching 2813, compared with 3116 for Schilling and 3084 for Smoltz. Based on a per game basis, Smoltz was good for 8 K’s per nine innings pitched, Mussina 7.1, and Schilling 8.6. While Mussina trails in another category, another point in Schilling’s favor is clear there, and Mike’s output is nothing to sneeze at. Strikeouts are only a part of the game though, as keeping runners off the bases is a huge part of any pitchers game, and here, Mussina and Schilling share a portion of the lead, each walking 2 per nine, compared to Smoltz 2.6 free passes per game. Combined with hits allowed, Smoltz registered a 1.176 WHIP (walks plus hits per inning), slightly ahead of Mussina (1.192) and trailing Schilling at 1.137.
Finally, Smoltz allowed .7 HR/9, Mussina .9, and Schilling 1 – again all in the same neighborhood. So based on some more traditional stats (Wins, Losses, K’s, BB’s, hits and HR’s), all three certainly seem comparable…all the more so with some basic back of the napkin adjustments for relative competition and ballpark factors.
Moving to more advanced measurements, Mussina and Schilling actually tend to pull away from Smoltz in some categories. WAR, which measures a players overall value relative to a hypothetical player (think a Quad A or fringe Major League player – the kind of guy typically on the AAA shuttle, or frequenting the waiver wire) is particularly favorable to the two. Mussina (83) and Schilling (79.9) ranked 5th and 6th of the eligible players – coming in just behind the now immortalized Randy Johnson and Pedro Martinez. Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens pace the field in the category, but they were not elected for other, well-known reasons. John Smoltz in comparison, ranks tenth with 69.5, receiving some punishment for his missed 2000 season, and his years as a closer. Setting aside the argument that those innings were more high leverage and valuable, it is difficult for a closer to rack up value pitching a relatively limited amount of innings. Mariano Rivera, widely held as the greatest closer ever managed just 56.6 WAR in his 19 years.
The gap gets worse when using WAR7 – a modification of WAR to look at a player’s 7 best seasons (not necessarily consecutively). Here – Schilling ranks 5th with 49, Mussina slips to 9th at 44.5, and Smoltz falls all the way to 38.8. Based on this metric, Smoltz clearly lags behind the other two, who provided more value during their best seasons.
One of the main arguments in favor of Smoltz is his record of post season success, and its hard to argue that he was a spectacular pitcher in October. Almost exclusively with the Braves, he managed a 15-4 Record (With 4 saves), 2.67 ERA and 2 Complete Games (1 Shutout) during 25 post season series with 209 innings pitched. During the Braves phenomenal run of success in the ’90’s and early 21st Century, he helped lead the team to 1 World Series win and 5 National League Championships.
Curt Schilling meanwhile has his own wealth of October lure – partnering with Randy Johnson to deny the Yankees their forth straight title in 2001, and gaining fame for gusty and dominating performances with the Red Sox. With just 12 series, Schilling did not have the chance to put together as deep a post season resume as Smoltz, but he certainly made the most of his trips to October. 3 Word Series Titles, 4 Pennants, and a pair of series MVP awards (’93 NLCS and 2001 World Series) compared with 1 NLCS MVP for Smoltz (1992). In 19 Games (all starts) Curt was nearly unbeatable – 11-2. 2.23 ERA in 133.1 Innings, completing 4 games (with 2 shutouts). Aside from the difference in post season appearances, its hard to see Smoltz as the better post season pitcher when compared directly to Smoltz.
Mussina lacks the storied success of the other two pitchers, but was not a slouch either. While he struggled to a 7-8 record, and failed to win a World Series, his Yankees did capture two ALCS wins and he managed a 3.42 ERA (in front of some rough defensive teams) in 139.2 Innings. While getting tagged with 2 losses in the 2003 ALCS, his performance in Game 7 is often overshadowed by Aaron Boone’s extra inning heroics and Mariano Rivera’s three inning relief appearance, it can be argued that his work was what saved the Yankees season. After Roger Clemens got knocked out in the 4th inning, Mike Mussina game in with no outs, two men on, and trailing 4-0. Moose promptly struck out Jason Varitek and induced a double play from Johnny Damon. When he left the game after the 6th, New York still trailed by three, but he had succeeded in holding the Sox at 4 runs, and giving the Yankees the chance to win.
So, where does that leave us? Laid out like this, I still fail to see a huge difference between the three. In fact, a strong case can be made that at least Schilling is a better choice for the Hall than Smoltz, and that Mussina is close to dead even while granting Smoltz a huge amount of credit for his postseason success. Instead, we have Smoltz in the Hall, and his two contemporaries on the outside looking in. While Smoltz is a truly outstanding pitcher, and well-worthy of enshrinement, it will not sit well if he is not joined by the other two righties in the next few years.
Ironically, it seems like the main case for Smoltz inclusion is coming from his least valuable seasons. When he was injured and moved to the bullpen in 2000 he certainly excelled, and much can be set for his adaptability and willingness to help the team in anyway needed. After 3-plus seasons of success, he was lauded as a latter-day Dennis Eckersley, and his eventual elevation to baseball’s loftiest perch all but guaranteed. In reality, the Braves would almost definitely have been better off with Smoltz as part of their starting five after he rebuilt his arm strength following surgery.
Blog to be Named Later 