If I were to tell you that a pitcher finished his career with 287 wins, a 3.31 earned run average, 3701 strikeouts (5th all-time), and 2 World Series rings, you'd probably say that he would be a Hall of Famer right? Well, if your name is Bert Blyleven, that's not the case. Because for the 13th straight year, Blyleven fell below the necessary 75% of votes to get the call to Cooperstown. This year was the most gut-wrenching. With an incredibly weak list of names on the ballot, it seemed like it was finally his year. 'Twas not so, as he fell just 5 votes shy of the 405 needed. So let me get this straight - the Baseball Writers' Association of America (BBWAA) will elect Andre Dawson, who averaged a mere 20 home runs, 90 runs batted in, and a .279 batting average per season, but will leave out Blyleven? Let's be serious. Dawson's numbers, as put by Mike Francesa of WFAN, are because he played for 21 seasons. He was what Francesa called a "compiler." Because of his longevity, his numbers were good. If the writers are willing to put the Hawk in based on this strategy, then leaving out Blyleven is nothing short of ridiculous. 8 times he surpassed the 16-win mark, and had it not been for a few injury-riddled seasons, his numbers would look even better. For 17 of his 22 seasons, his ERA was below 3.30, and 10 times it was 2.99 or better. These numbers make up for the fact that his winning percentage (.534) was less than spectacular. Plus, his curveball is one of the filthiest ever. When writer Bob Klapisch asked Hall of Fame pitcher Goose Gossage about the curve, he put Blyleven in high regard, saying:
"Oh my God, that fucking curveball was unreal. People used to talked about [Dwight] Gooden's hook, I swear Blyleven's was better. I've never seen anything like it, then or now. You know the expression, 'dropping off the table?' That's what his curveball was like. It just disappeared. And the thing is, he threw it hard, then he'd blow that fastball right by you up in the strike zone. Guys had no chance." (see Klapisch's entire article here)
The biggest blemish on the Dutchman's record is that he never won a Cy Young, and only finished in the Top 4 in voting three times. Writers had no respect for him then, it should be no surprise that none comes now. But looking more closely at the teams he was on, was his 287-250 record entirely his fault? It's not his fault that he only made the postseason 3 times. It's not his fault that the 1984 Indians finished 6th in their division, or that the 1986 Twins finished 21 games out of 1st place. When given the opportunity, Blyleven thrived, going 4-1 with a 2.74 ERA in 6 postseason starts. It's not fair to ignore his dominance based on his teams' disappointing records. Besides, surely anyone willing to go around wearing shirts like this or being able to win a World Series wearing these deserves something, right?
Bottom line, a Hall of Fame pitcher is one that strikes fear into a hitter and can be described as dominant. Was Bert Blyleven dominant? Gossage: "Hell, yes. Dominant pitcher, great pitcher." Brooks Robinson, Hall of Fame Class of 1983: "Bert was a terrific pitcher - a dominant pitcher."
The stats are there. The fear and intimidation factors are there. Now all that's missing are 5 measly votes.
No comments:
Post a Comment