Baseball's Hall of Fame or Hall of Shame (32 page)
Jenkins finally received the recognition he so richly deserved in 1971 when he was voted the league’s Cy Young Award winner. That year, he finished 24-13, with a 2.77 ERA, 263 strikeouts, 325 innings pitched, and 30 complete games to beat out Seaver for the award. Even that year, though, he was somewhat overshadowed by Oakland’s Vida Blue, who won both the Cy Young and MVP Awards in the American League.
After being traded to Texas following the 1973 campaign in the deal that brought Bill Madlock to the Cubs, Jenkins had another great season for the Rangers in 1974. That year, he finished 25-12, with a 2.82 ERA, 225 strikeouts, 328 innings pitched, and 29 complete games. However, he finished second to Catfish Hunter in the A.L. Cy Young voting. Jenkins had only one more big year, winning 18 games for Texas in 1978, but, at his peak, he was a dominant pitcher and a well-qualified Hall of Famer.
During his career, Jenkins won 20 games seven times, compiled at least 16 victories three other times, finished with an ERA under 3.00 four times, struck out more than 200 batters six times, surpassing the 250-mark on four separate occasions, threw more than 300 innings five times, and completed more than 20 games eight times. He finished with 284 wins, against 226 losses.
In his 22 big league seasons, Gaylord Perry pitched for eight different clubs. He spent his peak years with the San Francisco Giants and Cleveland Indians. In ten seasons with the Giants, from 1962 to 1971, Perry was a 20-game winner twice, and he won at least 15 games four other times. While he was a good pitcher from 1966 to 1971, he was a very good one in only two of those seasons—1966 and 1970. In 1966, Perry finished 21-8 with a 2.99 ERA and 201 strikeouts. In 1970, he finished 23-13 with a 3.20 ERA, 214 strikeouts, 328 innings pitched, and 23 complete games. In each of the other four seasons during that stretch, Perry’s ERA was well below 3.00, but his wins barely outnumbered his losses. In 1967, he finished 15-17; 1968, 16-15; 1969, 19-14; and 1971, 16-12. Perry’s rather mediocre won-lost record those years cannot be blamed on the fact that the Giants were a bad team because they were a perennial contender. Thus, in his years with San Francisco, Perry was a good pitcher; but he was not a Hall of Fame caliber hurler.
However, after being traded to the Cleveland Indians for Sam McDowell prior to the start of the 1972 season, Perry had his greatest season. That year, pitching for a mediocre team, he led the league with 24 wins (against 16 losses), and compiled a 1.92 ERA, 234 strikeouts, 342 innings pitched, and 29 complete games in winning the A.L. Cy Young Award. After an unspectacular 1973 season, Perry returned to top form in 1974, winning 21 games and finishing with a 2.51 ERA, 216 strikeouts, 322 innings pitched, and 28 complete games.
After three more mediocre seasons for the Indians and Texas Rangers, Perry won his second Cy Young Award in 1978 as a member of the San Diego Padres. That year, he won 21 games while losing only 6 and compiling a 2.73 ERA. The rest of his career, Perry was merely a .500 pitcher, never again winning more than 12 games. In all, he was a 20-game winner five times and finished with an ERA under 3.00 nine times. He finished his career with 314 victories, against 265 losses.
Perry was a very good pitcher. But was he good enough to be considered a legitimate Hall of Famer? If one ascribes to the theory that 300 wins should automatically guarantee a pitcher election to Cooperstown the answer is yes. The feeling here, though, is that other things must be factored into the equation as well. A win total in excess of 300 certainly goes a long way towards justifying a pitcher’s place in Cooperstown since it is indicative of a certain amount of sustained excellence over a lengthy period of time. However, a pitcher’s overall performance must be evaluated, and the level of dominance he displayed throughout his career needs to be examined before his name can be linked to the all-time greats.
In Perry’s case, while he won two Cy Young Awards, he was never considered to be the best pitcher in baseball. In 1972, that honor went to the Phillies Steve Carlton, and in 1978, New York’s Ron Guidry was clearly the best pitcher in the game. In fact, in only a few seasons could it even be said that Perry was the best pitcher on his own team’s staff, since, in his years with San Francisco, Juan Marichal was generally considered to be the staff ace. However, Perry was among the five best pitchers in baseball in at least four seasons—1970, 1972, 1974, and 1978. He led his league in wins three times, innings pitched twice, complete games twice, and shutouts once. As was noted earlier, he won two Cy Young Awards, and he also finished in the top five in the Cy Young voting two other times. In addition, Perry placed in the top 10 in the MVP voting twice and was selected to the All-Star Team five times.
Overall, it would seem that Perry fared moderately well when using our Hall of Fame criteria to examine his credentials. That, in conjunction with his 314 victories, is probably enough to justify his 1991 election by the BBWAA. However, he should be viewed as a somewhat borderline selection, and as a prime example of how a simple standard such as 300 wins or 500 home runs should not be used as the sole criteria for judging whether or not a player belongs in Cooperstown.
Pud Galvin/Charley Radbourn/Mickey Welch/
Tim Keefe/John Clarkson/Kid Nichols
While on the subject of pitchers who won 300 games, there were six 19th century hurlers who were elected to the Hall of Fame by the Veterans Committee prior to 1973. Just looking at their win totals, one would assume they earned their places in Cooperstown. However, when these men pitched, the sport of baseball differed drastically from the game it eventually became—even the one that was played during the early years of the 20th century.
In the very early days of baseball, prior to the turn of the last century, it was not at all unusual for a team’s best pitcher to start as much as 40, or even, 50 percent of his team’s games. Top pitchers typically made between 55 and 75 starts, and came away with anywhere from 50 to 70 decisions. Therefore, it was not that unusual for a good pitcher to win as many as 40 games, and lose as many as 25. That being the case, 300 victories, while still an impressive figure, was not nearly as difficult a mark to reach as it would become in later years. As a result, there really is a need to look more closely at the careers of these six men to determine if they truly belong in the Hall of Fame.
The first of these 19th century pitchers was Jim “Pud” Galvin, who pitched for four different teams during a career that started in 1875 and ended in 1892. Twice Galvin started more than 70 games in a season, once 66, and five other times more than 50. Needless to say, he had an inordinate number of decisions, winning and losing more than 20 games ten times each. Galvin won 46 games twice, and 37 once. However, he also lost 35 games once, and 29 another time. His best season came in 1884, when, pitching for the Buffalo Bisons, he finished 46-22 with a 1.99 ERA, 369 strikeouts, 12 shutouts, and an incredible 71 complete games and 636 innings pitched. Amazingly enough, though, Galvin didn’t lead the league that year in any major pitching category. In fact, he never led the league in wins, ERA, or strikeouts. However, in 1883, he was the league-leader in games (76), complete games (72), shutouts (5), and innings pitched (656). Galvin ended his career with a record of 365-310 and a 2.85 ERA.
While he was not the best pitcher of his era, and probably should not be thought of as having been anything more than a very good pitcher, Galvin was able to distinguish himself in two distinct ways. First, he won more games than any other hurler who pitched exclusively during the 19th century. He is also the only pitcher in history to win at least 20 games ten times without ever playing on a pennant winner. On the other hand, Galvin had only two truly great years, and just three other very good ones. He also finished with a losing record in five of his 15 big league seasons. The Veterans Committee elected him to the Hall of Fame in 1965.
The career of Charley “Old Hoss” Radbourn did not last as long as that of Galvin, but he still managed to win over 300 games. Pitching for three different teams during his 11-year major league career, Radbourn had his greatest seasons with the Providence Grays. Pitching for Providence from 1881 to 1885, he won at least 25 games every season, never finishing with an ERA any higher than 2.43. He was baseball’s greatest pitcher in both 1883 and 1884. In the first of those years, he finished 48-25, with a 2.05 ERA, 315 strikeouts, 66 complete games, and 632 innings pitched. The following season, he was even better, leading the league’s pitchers in every major statistical category by compiling a record of 59-12, with an ERA of 1.38, 441 strikeouts, 11 shutouts, 73 complete games, and 678 innings pitched. Unfortunately, after throwing so many innings those two seasons, Radbourn was never quite the same pitcher after 1884. Yet he still managed to win more than 20 games nine times (while losing over 20 games five times) and compile a career record of 309 wins against only 195 losses, and an ERA of 2.67. He led the league in wins, winning percentage, strikeouts, and games pitched twice each, and in complete games, innings pitched, shutouts, and ERA once each. Radbourn was elected by the Veterans Committee in 1939.
Mickey Welch broke in with the Troy Trojans in 1880 and spent three seasons there, never truly distinguishing himself. His record over those three seasons was a very mediocre 69-64. However, after one more less-than-spectacular season with the New York Giants in 1883, Welch developed into one of the finest pitchers in baseball. Over the next three seasons, he compiled records of 39-21, 44-11, and 33-22, and finished with an ERA under 3.00 each year. He was at his best in 1885, when, in addition to winning 44 games, he finished with an ERA of 1.66, 258 strikeouts, 492 innings pitched, 55 complete games, and seven shutouts. He also won more than 20 games in each season from 1887 to 1889, compiling a 1.93 ERA in 1888, and finishing 27-12 the following year. He ended his career with a won-lost record of 307-210 and a 2.71 ERA.
The problem with Welch, though, is that he was an exceptional pitcher for only three seasons, and a very good one for only two others. In addition, he was not the dominant pitcher of his era, never having led the league in any major pitching category. He was selected by the Veterans Committee in 1973.
A teammate of Welch’s for a good portion of his career was Tim Keefe. Like Welch, Keefe broke in with the Troy Trojans in 1880 and spent three seasons there. After losing more games than he won with the Trojans, Keefe moved on to the New York Metropolitans in 1883 with whom he accumulated win totals of 41 and 37 over the next two seasons. Keefe rejoined his former teammate Welch with the Giants in 1885, where he won more than 30 games in each of the next four seasons and twice finished with an ERA of less than 2.00. Over the course of his career, Keefe won more than 40 games twice, topped the 30-mark four other times, and once won 28 games. He struck out more than 300 batters three times and finished with an ERA under 3.00 eight times. Unlike Welch, he led the league in every major pitching category at least once during his career, topping the N.L. in wins, ERA, strikeouts, innings pitched, and complete games twice each. Keefe finished with a record of 342-225, and an ERA of 2.62. The Veterans Committee elected him to the Hall of Fame in 1964.
Perhaps the best of the 19th century pitchers was John Clarkson, who, in his 13 big-league seasons, managed to win 328 games, while losing only 178, for an outstanding winning percentage of .648. During his career, Clarkson led the league in wins, strikeouts, and complete games three times each, ERA once, innings pitched four times, and shutouts twice. He had his finest season in 1885, when he led the league in virtually every statistical category. That year, he finished 53-16, with an ERA of 1.85, 308 strikeouts, 623 innings pitched, 68 complete games, and 10 shutouts. Four years later, he had another brilliant season, compiling a record of 49-19, with a 2.73 ERA, 284 strikeouts, 620 innings pitched, 68 complete games, and 8 shutouts. He won more than 30 games three other times and finished his career with a 2.81 ERA. He was elected by the Veterans Committee in 1963.
Kid Nichols is the only one of these six men whose career extended into the first few years of the 20th century. Pitching mostly for the Boston Beaneaters (who eventually became the Braves) during his 15-year major league career, Nichols was, along with Cy Young, the finest pitcher in the game during the last decade of the 19th century. He was a 20-game winner in every season from 1890 to 1899, and he won at least 30 games seven times during that period. Unlike most top pitchers of his era, Nichols never lost as many as 20 games in a season, and he finished his career with an outstanding .634 winning percentage. He led the league in wins and shutouts three times each, and in innings pitched once.
Nichols had perhaps his finest season for the Braves in 1892, when he finished 35-16 with a 2.84 ERA, 453 innings pitched, and 49 complete games. He had another great year for Boston in 1898, when he compiled a record of 31-12 with an ERA of 2.13. Nichols was a 20-game winner eleven times and compiled an ERA of less than 3.00 nine times. He finished his career with a record of 361-208 and an ERA of 2.95, pitching mostly during an era (1892-1900) in which the rules governing the game favored the batter. Nichols was elected by the Veterans Committee in 1949.
Now, back to the issue at hand. Should these men be thought of as legitimate Hall of Famers? When one considers the extent to which the game differed when these six baseball pioneers pitched, the answer to this question is not a simple one. It would seem that Clarkson, Radbourn, and Nichols had the most impressive credentials, followed closely by Keefe. Each of those four men clearly earned their places in Cooperstown. Welch and Galvin were obviously fine pitchers, but they would have to be considered a notch below the other four hurlers. Thus, one must view them as somewhat borderline Hall of Famers, although it is awfully difficult to argue against the admission of pitchers who compiled such prodigious win totals. We will not do that here.
