01-07-2010, 12:16 PM
<!--quoteo(post=74400:date=Jan 6 2010, 07:35 PM:name=Runnys)-->QUOTE (Runnys @ Jan 6 2010, 07:35 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Veryzer...just curious, what is your rationale behind Blyleven not being a HOFer?<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Blyleven pitched in a pitcher friendly era and never dominated at any point in his career. Never lead the league in wins, never lead the league in ERA, only lead the league once in strike outs and complete games. He was a solid pitcher but not even in the top ten of his era and maybe not even in the top 20 (though I'd have to look that up to be sure). No way he belongs.
And I realize that wins/losses are a "team stat" but the fact of the matter is, the great pitchers win games. Blyleven won a lot of games, but he lost nearly as many, and as an old timer, i have to count that against him.
Blyleven pitched in a pitcher friendly era and never dominated at any point in his career. Never lead the league in wins, never lead the league in ERA, only lead the league once in strike outs and complete games. He was a solid pitcher but not even in the top ten of his era and maybe not even in the top 20 (though I'd have to look that up to be sure). No way he belongs.
And I realize that wins/losses are a "team stat" but the fact of the matter is, the great pitchers win games. Blyleven won a lot of games, but he lost nearly as many, and as an old timer, i have to count that against him.
Wang.