Mike Mussina

This article make the exact argument. He is HOFer based on stats, but not domination. I would compare him to Tommy John though not Brown.
http://lastwordonsports.com/2015/01/16/ ... -of-famer/

We seem to be going around in circles, somewhat. Yes, Mussina and Tommy John both pitched for a long time, but otherwise it's a false equivalency. In terms of performance, Mussina was a LOT better than Tommy John. Lets look at their lines:

John: 288-231/ .555/ 111 ERA+/ 62.3 WAR
Mussina: 270-153/ .638 / 123 ERA+/ 82.7 WAR

Both John and Mussina pitched mostly for good teams. Granted that, there's a very big difference between a .555 w/l % and .638. There's a big different between 111 OPS+ and 123. There's a big difference between 62.3 and 82.7 WAR. In terms of wins and losses, think of it this way. John's 18 extra wins cost 78 extra losses. That's a whole lot of losses--half a season's worth. And those losses are a direct product of John's significantly weaker ERA relative to his leagues.

Mussina's combo of wins, w/l pct, ERA+ and WAR place him in elite company. Very few pitchers have performed at that level along that range of measures.

As everybody agrees, the legitimate knock against him is that he wasn't ever the best pitcher in his league. But that shouldn't be disqualifying in an of itself. He was frequently among the top 5. He finished between 2 and 6 in the CYA 9 times. That isn't just hanging-around performance. John finished in the top 6 in CYA only 3 times. Another way to look at this is HOF Black Ink vs Grey Ink. Black Ink measures league leading performance in various categories, while grey ink measures top 10 performance. Mussina has 15 points for black ink, whereas the HOF average is 40 pts. That shows that he wasn't dominant. But he also has 250 for grey ink, while the HOF average is 185. This only happens if you're really good for a really long time. This makes him a type of player who usually doesn't get selected in the first round, but whose career stats eventually prove so overwhelming that he makes it in a subsequent round.

HOF voters are looking for both dominance and high level performance over a long career. Only the very, very best players have both. Greg Maddux, Walter Johnson, Randy Johnson, etc.—they have both, and they get in right away. Koufax and Dizzy Dean, had short but dominant careers. They got in too. Mussina had a career that was never dominant, but that was long and brilliant, and that's something special in itself.

We had the same thing with Carlton and Sutton. They had virtually identical career stats, but Carlton had a bunch of dominant season, which Sutton didn't. I think it was appropriate that Carlton got in the HOF in the first round and that Sutton had to wait a few years. But if Sutton had never been selected, it would have been a real injustice. He belongs in the HOF too.

Getting back to John and Mussina --the HOF voters have already shown that they recognize a difference. John was voted on 15 times. He started with 21.3% of the vote and never got more than 31% (in his last year of eligibility). This was the only time John broke 30%, showing he never got any momentum behind him. Mussina started at 20.3%, but in 4 seasons he's already up to 51.8%. Mussina's clearly got momentum, as voters begin to absorb the meaning of his career. I think that he will ultimately be chosen by the HOF voters. It's probably just a matter of time.

There are counter arguments for those too. John had much stronger ballot competition with the starting pitchers coming from the 60's, 70' and 80's. The "grey ink" test fails to capture that bias. If you look at the "grey ink" of the relief pitchers from that era with Mussina's era I bet you can find a bias there too.

Tommy John pitched for some horrible White Sox teams. His record in 1970-71 was 25-33. Between 1972-1980 his record was 130-60 or a .684 winning pct

Mussina was never brilliant, he was good. Noone ever feared Mussina as a playoff matchup. Here are some postseason reviews of his performance. He struck out a lot of batters. He will probably be in the Hall of Fame that is what it takes now to be in the Hall.

n 2002, Mussina went 18-10 with a 4.05 ERA. Moose was third in the league with strikeouts with 182 and strikeouts per nine innings pitched (7.60). That postseason Moose was 0-1 with a 9.00 ERA giving up four runs in four IP as the Yankees were eliminated in the first round 3-1 by the Los Angeles Angels.

In 2003 Mike went 17-8 with a 3.40 ERA. He had 195 strikeouts in 214.2 innings. In the ALDS that season Moose got the only loss as the Yankees beat the Twins 3-1. Moose lost the first game of the series 3-1.

In the ALCS against the hated Red Sox, Moose lost the first game of that series as well, 5-2. In Game Four of the series Mussina again got the loss, 3-2.


Moose pitched in Game Seven, only not as a starter. He made his first career relief appearance. Moose came in with runners on the corners and no outs. Moose first got Jason Varitek to strike out before getting Johnny Damon to ground into a double play to end the inning.

Moose would pitch two more scoreless innings and on a walk off home run by Aaron Boone, the Yankees were headed to the World Series.

In the World Series, Moose got the win in Game Three of the series, 6-1. That was the only game Moose would pitch in the World Series as the Marlins defeated the Yankees in six games. Moose went 29.1 innings gave up 11 runs and struck out 32 that postseason.

In 2004, Moose battled injuries that year but still went 12-9 with a 4.59 ERA. In the postseason, Moose again lost the first game of the ALDS, 2-0. In the ALCS against Boston, Mussina won the first game of the series 10-7. Moose also pitched in Game Five of the ALCS. Moose pitched seven innings giving up just two runs. But, the Yankees couldn't hold on to the lead and the Yankees were eliminated from the playoffs.

In 2005, Moose went 13-8 with a 4.41 ERA. In the postseason Moose won the first game of the ALDS 4-2 pitching 5.2 scoreless innings. In Game Five Moose was not as sharp only going 2.2 innings and giving up five runs. The Yankees lost that game 5-3 and were eliminated from the playoffs.

In 2006, Moose went 15-7 with a 3.51 ERA. His OBP against was .270 and he became the first pitcher ever in the American League to win 10 or more games for 15 consecutive seasons.

To me, he's a Hall of Famer, though not of the first-ballot type. He played his career in the AL East, first in his prime with Baltimore in that bandbox, with the DH, with the steroid era in full bloom, and had an home ERA under 4. Then he went on to the Yankees and ended up with 270 wins, including winning 20 in his final season. He was very very good. For the sabermetrically inclined, he is in the Top 100 ERA+, with a 123 (tied for 87th). Hall of Famers Bob Gibson and Tom Seaver, generally regarded as gold standard hall of famers are at 127. Juan Marichal is at 123. Other HOF pitchers like Drysdale (121) and Bob Feller (122). Moose is a HOF pitcher.