James ranks Hunter ahead of Morris, I’m pretty sure.
Bill’s from Kansas, grew up rooting for Catfish.
By coincidence, Bill James just released his “Runs Saved” for the 1980s by shortstops on his proprietary website (hence no link, though Bill has given permission to quote judiciously from the site elsewhere) and it illustrates the point Ozzie’s supporters have been making. Hmm,can’t get it to format as a table, so I’ll sum up: Ozzie Rules. He led the NL 9 years out of 10, saving about 40 runs per non-strike year, with the runner-up saving about 35–which is to say, he won nearly an entire game per season with his glove alone over and above what a terrific shortstop (the second-best fielding ss in the the league) would have won. That is a lot.
RickJay said:
And you didn’t even mention his almost equally sweet mustachio.
Morris rocked his stache. Dave Steib was another excellent 80’s moustache.
But the Hall of Facial Hair would be totally dominated by 19th century players, with a blip in the 70s and 80s. Look at some of these glorious moustaches:
http://tradercracks.com/blog/2010/06/06/gallery-1895-mayos-cut-plug-baseball/
Jack Glasscock looks like he was born wearing that stache. George Haddock’s got a badass serial killer thing going on there. And check out Tom Kinslow, oh my God; that moustache is like if they invented a machine that could combine Steven Seagal and Jean Claude Van Damme into pure hair and implant it onto a man’s face. John Ward’s moustache looks like a set of BMX bike handles.
And how do you compare an 1890 moustache with today’s motley array of goatees and facial hair? Joe Blanton looks like an idiot, but there is a skill and finesse to the facescaping of Eric Thames that rivals Michaelangelo’s work.
And do steroids affect hair growth? How do we rate Rafael Palmiero’s awesome retro stache - was it natural talent, or the cream and the clear that grew that face-flag?
Surprised at the Ozzie Smith hate above. The man was an amazing player and a first-ballot choice. He was a weak hitter, even at shortstop, but stole 580 bases. He’s probably in the top half of the HOF.
I didn’t much like Bruce Sutter when he was playing, but he defined the role of the closer. Herman Franks realized that using Sutter like Mike Marshall mean that Bruce would break down in the last part of the season, so he came up with the strategy of using Sutter only in close games with a lead to protect. Everyone else followed suit. That’s why Sutter is in: he utterly changed the game. I’m not sure I agree with this logic, but that’s why he’s in. Hard to say he’s the worst player there, even if this revolution in baseball strategy came because of Sutter’s limitations (mostly) as opposed to his talents.
McCarthy isn’t a bad choice for worst player in the Hall, and neither is Bill James’ pick, George Kelly. My selection would be Wilbert Robinson. Some of you may cry that he got in as a manager. Using the criteria in James’ Book of Baseball Managers, Wilbert Robinson is not in the top 70 managers of all time anymore. James had him rated #88 at catcher ten years ago; he’s probably no longer in the top 100 at his position now. Wilbert Robinson is in the Hall of Fame because he was a fun guy to be around and people liked him. (Did he benefit from the Frisch years? I don’t know.) If I were trimming Cooperstown, he’d be the first one to go.
Forget it, Jake. It’s Gonzomax.
Did Palmiero’s steroid use lead to his need to supplement in other areas?
Hello! Brian Wilson! Especially when he dyed it silver. Awesome.
I thought Fingers was the pioneer of the closer role? He was racking up 20 save seasons a few years before Sutter broke into the leauge. And he was typically doing it while averaging fewer than 2 innings per appearance, so it’s not like he was piling up those legendary 3 inning saves the old timers like to boast about.
If you look at Bruce Sutter’s stats, it’s hard to justify his inclusion in the HOF. He barely cracked 1000 IP. He sits on exactly 300 saves.
It’s also kind of amusing that the year he won his Cy Young, 1979, Joe Niekro actually finished higher in the MVP voting. Niekro was probably robbed of some Cy Young votes (he was 2nd) to his teammate, JR Richard, but all this info is really neither here nor there in regards to Sutter’s HOF worthiness.
Hunter’s ERA is also a lot lower than Morris’ which is about 3.90. In fact, his high ERA is likely what’s keeping Morris out of the HOF.
That’s quite probable, but I have to point out that taken in context, Morris’s ERA is as good as Hunter’s. Hunter pitched in pitcher’s parks in leagues that generally scored fewer runs.
I know the HOF voters don’t necessarily care, but by point is Hunter is a very, very poor choice. I don’t even think Morris would be a good choice, and yet I think he is probably a greater pitcher than Catfish. Tommy John’s better than either guy.
I once played a HS Baseball game in Cooperstown. I went to a nearby High School. I was shitty.
Eppa Rixey was a very poor choice. He got 266 wins, but that’s more a function of longeivity (21 seasons in the majors) and the era he played in (1912 - 1933) than brilliance.
He led the league in wins, shutouts and innings pitched only once each, never led the league in ERA, and also finished only 15 games over .500 for his career. His adjusted ERA+ is 115, which ranks only 206th all-time.
One more thing which grabbed my attention - what happened to the BBWAA in the late '50s / early 60’s? Until 1955, Rixey never got more than 4.1% of the vote, and was as low as 0.4% at one point, but in 1960 he got 52.8%! He wouldn’t have lasted beyond his 1st year on the ballot had those percentages been recorded today.
In another thread Hunter’s success was explained:
Hunter, Kelly, and Maranville are in because they had memorable nicknames.
Catfish Hunter probably IS undeserving… he just doesn’t strike me (or most people) as an atrocious miscarriage of justice. Rather, he’s the embodiment of the cliche “It’s the Hall of Fame, not the Hall of Very Good.”
That is, NOBODY worth taking seriously is saying “Catfish Hunter stunk.” But even when he was first elected, my reaction was, "Well, that’s nice… but was he notably better than contemporaries like Mike Cuellar or Dave McNally or Mickey Lolich? Was he significantly better than Jerry Koosman or Jim Kaat or Jim Perry? Even Larry Dierker or Mel Stottlemyre?
Not really. Catfish was a VERY good pitcher, and I’m glad my Yankees had him for a while (though he only had ONE truly good season for us), but he never struck me as one of the all-time greats.
I’m just glad no one has brought up Ray Schalk. He was a below-average hitter, but an amazing catcher. I’m very glad he’s in the Hall of Fame.
ETA: I agree with astorian about Catfish. I’m not too upset about him being in, but he was never a towering figure in the game. I WAS upset about Jim Rice going in with similar credentials. Not sure why that is.
Well, almost no one. 
I compared Catfish Hunter to a bunch of his contemporaries, all of whom seemed to me about as good as he was. But to me, the best guy to compare Catfish to is another former Yankees pitcher: Allie “The Chief” Reynolds.
Like Catfish, Allie Reynolds had a very good winning percentage (not surprising, since both played for great teams that established dynasties), a good but not dazzling ERA (and ERA+), and several World Series rings. But unlike Catfish, Allie didn’t get strong Hall of Fame consideration.
If ONLY one of them could be in the Hall, I’d actually lean toward the Chief, myself.