Michael Bronson

[Michael Bronson @MichaelBronson8]

@jb1191991 @LVBookie @notgaetti Not a hard-and-fast rule but far more of a factor then. Your cite to 3 all-time legend defenders, 2 500-HR club members, and an elite catcher highlights the point. Now sub-.300 will be the overwhelming rule and not the exception.

[Michael Bronson @MichaelBronson8]

@BravesStats @notgaetti Not meant as an attack on Hoffman or to prop up deGrom. Just making the point that a pitcher shouldn’t be DQ’ed exclusively for not playing enough baseball when he’s played more than other HOFers.

[Michael Bronson @MichaelBronson8]

@TotalChaosGuy @podoffame Compared only for purposes of challenging as a HOF disqualification that “he hasn’t played enough baseball.” If the position is that HOF SPs traditionally have more IP, that’s a different and better argument.

[Michael Bronson @MichaelBronson8]

@BBGreatMoments And wild pitches, and stolen bases against. But still a no brainer first ballot legend.

[Michael Bronson @MichaelBronson8]

@notgaetti Quite possibly, but they should be evaluated in the context of their era and contemporaries just like pitchers of the future.

[Michael Bronson @MichaelBronson8]

@LouCorsaro @notgaetti Yes, exactly. Saying he didn’t play enough baseball to make the HOF - period - doesn’t make any sense. Saying his workload doesn’t stack up against other HOF SPs does make sense. This was my only point.

[Michael Bronson @MichaelBronson8]

@strange_brew_us Criticism was unqualified “deGrom hasn’t played enough baseball.” There are plenty of valid criticisms, but that isn’t one of them.

[Michael Bronson @MichaelBronson8]

@mchoma23 @podoffame “He compared unfavorably to peers at his position” is a time-tested and appropriate test. “He hasn’t played enough baseball,” by itself, doesn’t hold up if he’s played more than other HOFers.

[Michael Bronson @MichaelBronson8]

@Bill_Drain1 @podoffame If that is explicitly part of the argument, no beef.

[Michael Bronson @MichaelBronson8]

@bruceschoenfeld @podoffame Totally agree. Again, not here to make the case for deGrom. I just think that if the new standard is SPs go 5-6 innings, we’re either going to have to reduce emphasis on IP or stop letting them in the HOF.

[Michael Bronson @MichaelBronson8]

@LouCorsaro @notgaetti Because the argument made against him didn’t carve out SPs. It was that he hasn’t played enough baseball.

[Michael Bronson @MichaelBronson8]

@Bill_Drain1 @podoffame I hear you, but the argument made against him didn’t distinguish between SPs and RPs. It was that he hadn’t played enough baseball.

[Michael Bronson @MichaelBronson8]

@bruceschoenfeld @podoffame Don’t disagree with a single word of this, and it’s consistent with my point. Judge the body of work (as you do here) and don’t come up with arbitrary tests like whether someone played enough baseball.

[Michael Bronson @MichaelBronson8]

@mchoma23 @podoffame No problem with Hoffman being in or deGrom being out. My only problem would be a standard based exclusively on whether someone has “played enough baseball” that keeps out players who have more IP.

[Michael Bronson @MichaelBronson8]

@kitjenson @podoffame Agree and not intended as apples-to-apples - merely that “he didn’t pitch enough” by itself is not a sound reason to dismiss a candidacy if he pitched significantly more than other HOFers.

[Michael Bronson @MichaelBronson8]

@bruceschoenfeld @podoffame I’m not anti-Hoffman or pro-deGrom. But simply dismissing a candidacy b/c someone didn’t play enough baseball doesn’t hold up if he played more than other HOFers. On your terms, any inning can be outcome-determinative, and deGrom has far more.

[Michael Bronson @MichaelBronson8]

@LouCorsaro @notgaetti Agree closers should be evaluated separately. My reply was specifically targeting the argument that a dominant SP (not even deGrom, necessarily) should be eliminated from consideration simply b/c they haven’t pitched enough innings when they have more IP than other HOFers.

[Michael Bronson @MichaelBronson8]

@Bill_Drain1 @podoffame One of the primary arguments offered against deGrom is that he hasn’t pitched enough. This undermines that argument. Completely agree elite relievers should be evaluated differently.

[Michael Bronson @MichaelBronson8]

@PauleyMo67 @notgaetti Either we reserve the HOF for relievers like the ones you list or we start letting in dominant SPs who only went to the 6th inning. Can’t see another path that makes sense.

[Michael Bronson @MichaelBronson8]

@podoffame Fair assessment. Clearly the guys you identify are ahead of him and you have to draw the line somewhere. I just think it’s going to get tougher to punish SPs with low historical IP if closers keep getting in (which they should).