NL East: Braves call 11:30 a.m. news conference

The press gathering will be attended by John Smoltz, along with Frank Wren and Bobby Cox. Shoulder surgery for Smoltz will be confirmed, but it may also signal retirement for the 41-year-old hurler.

From the Atlanta Journal Constitution: After spending nearly five weeks on the disabled list with inflammation of the rotator cuff and biceps tendon in his throwing shoulder, Smoltz returned from the DL Monday night and blew a save against Florida in his first relief appearance in 44 months. Smoltz had moved back to the bullpen from his preferred starting role as a concession to persistent pain in his throwing shoulder. He had hoped he could get through the season by pitching in one-inning stints and by altering his pitching delivery and throwing sidearm.

Smoltz has had four right-elbow surgeries and had said in recent years that he wouldn't endure another arm surgery and long rehabilitation to prolong his career. But on Monday he backed away from those statements and indicated he would consider surgery and all other options.

The 1996 Cy Young Award winner has a 210-147 career record with 154 saves and 3,011 strikeouts in 3,395 innings, all with the Braves. Smoltz is also the winningest postseason pitcher in history (15-4) and owns the record for postseason strikeouts (194). He notched his 3,000th career strikeout earlier this season.

Beerleaguer: One of my favorite non-Phillies. Hat tip to Smoltz if this is indeed the end of his marvelous career.

Comments

[BobbyD]

WOW!

[J. Weitzel]

Meanwhile, Pedro picks up the win for NY (6 IP, 3 ER, 3 K). I'm expecting him to be a stabilizing force the rest of the season for NY, not dominant, but tough. All guile with Pedro anymore.

[Jonesman]

Huge news, but not all that surprising. His modified delivery did not look sustainable.

[NEPhilliesPhan]

What I said earlier: He might not make it in on the 1st ballot but he is definitely a HoFer. He'll likely be up against teammates Glavine and Maddux on the ballot so it should be interesting. Randy Johnson and Pedro Martinez could retire as well so it would be a tough class to crack on the first try. Good career John.

[GM-Carson]

Weitzel- I am with you about liking Smoltz. I hated nearly every Brave over the decade+ run, but I always had a ton of respect and admiration for Smoltz. He's a Hall-of-Famer and a top class man.

[J. Weitzel]

It's hard to imagine Smoltz retiring. Maybe he won't. Nothing confirmed yet ...

[Matt]

Man, that Maddux-Glavine-Smoltz rotation in the 90's was amazing. Made Leo Mazzone look like some sort of guru. I think he was just lucky to have three Hall of Famers in the rotation at once. The real gurus were in the Atlanta front office.

[curt]

And so Moyer survives another challenge to his record as the only 50 year old starting pitcher ever. Two geriatic class acts.

[stjoehawk]

NEPhilliesPhan - Don't forget about Griffey & Frank Thomas. I wouldn't be shocked if this year was the last for either one. The 2014 class could be one of the best classes ever.

[from the district]

if this is the end it would set up a maddux, glavine, smoltz hall of fame ceremony

[NEPhilliesPhan]

Griffey: Yes
Thomas: No...too much time as a DH IMHO.

Honestly though, I wouldn't be surprised to see Maddux pitch next year...he's been pretty effective this season so there's no reason he can't keep going...I think he wants to get to 360 wins...and solidify his place as the best right hander of his generation.

[NEPhilliesPhan]

Umm...didn't Satchel Page pitch well into his 50's...Moyer's got a ways to go to catch him.

[GM-Carson]

Satchel did pitch when he was 58, but that was following a 12 season layoff.

Frank Thomas is a DH, but a Hall-of-Fame DH in my opinion.

[NEPhilliesPhan]

I love him for his run in the mid-90s but his power numbers will always be suspect because of his era. Thomas was the most dangerous hitter in baseball for a 5 year period.

Personally I don't feel that DH's should make the Hall...this includes guys like Ortiz.

My test for the Hall:

1. Ask yourself: Is (blank) a HoFer? Yes or No.

If you have to really think about it and then start justifying it, I don't think they should go in.

This would have prevented some travesties in the Hall like Gary Carter and some of the Yankees that are there because of the Veterans Committee.

[curt]

Naw, old Satch was done at age 48, except for 1 joke appearance many years later. A mere child.

[Bedrosian's Beard]

I'd say Thomas is a HOFer. I could see him maybe not getting in on the 1st ballot, if he's in a tough class, b/c he was DH, but he's gotta get in.

[Jimmie J.]

>>Satchel did pitch when he was 58, but that was following a 12 season layoff.<<

Satchel said he needed the time to build up his arm strength.

[GM-Carson]

Frank Thomas is a big, big man. I've never questioned his power numbers just because of his naturally immense size. And to be fair, he did play the field (1st base) for close to 1000 games in his career.

[NEPhilliesPhan]

Thanks for the clarification on Page...I will admit that there are some gaps in my knowledge of historical baseball facts...not that many but some.

[Bedrosian's Beard]

Jayson Stark (I think) was on Jody Mac once talking about the HOF and whether some borderline types like Tim Raines should make it and he made a good point (paraphrasing): Why do these types votes often increase with the years? For the most part, it should be easy to say "yes" or "no" for these guys. When you hear it's "X's last year of eligibilty for the HOF", that should be a sign of "he's not quite good enough" not "let me get my votes in for him now before it's too late!" If he wasn't good enough to vote for the 1st or 2nd time, why vote for him later?

[NEPhilliesPhan]

To GM-Carson: Don't get me wrong, I really like Thomas as a player but I feel he's borderline on the Hall. He'll probably get in and I won't be upset but I don't look at him and say "Wow...he's a 1st Ballot HoF."

If he wouldn't have stuck around for 500 HRs, I doubt he would get in.

Note: My comment concerning his power is what I feel others will think about him...his numbers will be somewhat unfairly judged because of his era. Personally, I tend to think players like him, Griffey, and Thome were probably clean.

There's a thought: Is Jim Thome a HoF? I love him but again he's somewhat one-dimensional.

[Casey]

No doubt in my mind that Frank Thomas is a Hall of Famer. If he doesn't make it in, I'll blame the 1994 strike that shortened his peak year. Still, he slugged .729 in 500 plate appearances and had an OPS+ of 211. He also played about 90% of the season in the field.

His decline has been long and painful (for him), but few have had more dominating peaks.

[curt]

However, I doubt Moyer can work past age 55, with a 55 mph fastball.

[NEPhilliesPhan]

On Tim Raines, I feel he is overlooked due to where he played (Canada) more than anything. If he had been a life-long Red Sox or Yankee he'd already be in.

[Bedrosian's Beard]

I guess my post above is basically NEPhilliephan" "is ___ a HOFer Yes or no". Occasionally, you can take a closer look at eras/stats and realize someone might deserve it, but otherwise, you should know.

[J. Weitzel]

In other news, Ryan Zimmerman will require shoulder surgery at some point. Washington is a non-factor in the division, but still. Phils are a healthy, happy bunch and are starting to separate themselves. Very few reasons why they can't see this through to the end.

[NEPhilliesPhan]

~now terrified of jinxing Phillies injurywise~

[Casey]

Also, why not vote for designated hitters? It's not their fault that the DH rule exists, and that players of a certain type are encouraged to put away their gloves on half the teams in baseball. If Babe Ruth were a DH (and he would be in today's game) would you not vote for him?

[stjoehawk]

In 2006, Ryan Howard had what we'd all agree was a great season, finishing with an OPS+ of 167.

From 1991-1997, Frank Thomas never had an OPS+ below 174.

[MG]

If Smoltz is retiring, then kudos. Very good pitcher who did what was required for his team and really the only Braves' starter of the 1990s who seemed to consistently show up in the postseason year in and year out.

Smoltz's career numbers as a starter are good (not great) but the impressive postseason career numbers and his numbers as a closer should put him in the HOF.

[NEPhilliesPhan]

Well Babe Ruth wasn't DH so that doesnt really matter.

Thomas is a HoF...but his lack of a glove his a huge negative. His numbers will get him in but it might not be on the 1st ballot.

[MG]

JW - I am psyched about how the Phils are playing but let's see where they stand after a rough couple of weeks in June. If they are still in first and up 2 or 3 games in the NL East the end of June, then I will really start to get excited about the playoffs.

[GM-Carson]

During the offseason I did a post on future hall-of-famers on my blog. If interested, check it out @ http://pabaseball.blogspot.com/2008/01/hall-of-fame-bound.html

[NEPhilliesPhan]

I did one on my old blog (which no longer exists) as well...I'll have to try and dig it up.

[NEPhilliesPhan]

GM-Carson: I responded on your blog, but its an intersting list...the only one that really threw me was Mussina. I just don't see it. He's never even been the best pitcher on his team for one.

[NEPhilliesPhan]

If Blyleven can't crack the hall, there is no way in hell Mussina should even be considered. No Cy Youngs (came in second once), only 5 AS selections, no 20 win seasons despite playing on several 100 win teams. Career Park Adjusted ERA 4.51

[GM-Carson]

Mussina was the best pitcher on his team when he was with the O's. I can see how he will be argued come Hall time, but imagine if he gets up to 260+ wins...that will be difficult to ignore.

[Jimmie J.]

I always had trouble accepting Willie Stargell as a HOFer. If you stripped away the HRs & RBI, how 'all-around' was he? Not the greatest fielder & slooow. All I heard when he was near the end of his career was how nice of a guy Pops was and what he did for the Pittsburgh community. Sorry, not good enough for me. A guy like Gary Carter (I was not a big fan) had more impact on the game as did potential HOFers such as Raines & Thomas.

[NEPhilliesPhan]

I point again to his Career ERA and Career WHIP...neither is dominant. He had the luxury on playing on some very good teams to rack up a decent win total but that doesnt make him a HoF.

Like Jim Edmonds, he is in the Hall of Very Good Ballplayers.

[NEPhilliesPhan]

If Jamie Moyer plays another year and gets up to 250+ wins...does that make him a Hall of Famer?

[GM-Carson]

NE- I understand your points. The players I listed were ones I thought would get into the Hall-of-Fame, not necessarily ones I think deserve to get in.

[Tray]

I believe Thomas has one of the ten highest career OBPs of all time. Pretty much a no-doubt Hall of Famer. I can't say whether he's a first-ballot or not; that stuff's always seemed stupid to me anyway.

[NEPhilliesPhan]

GM-Carson: NE- I understand your points. The players I listed were ones I thought would get into the Hall-of-Fame, not necessarily ones I think deserve to get in.

Fair enough...I apologize if I was coming off a little rude about it...arguing stuff like this is one of my favorite things to do.

Note: I looked again at Thomas's stats...he should likely get in...his run in the 90's was as incredible as I remembered it. He was probably the best hitter of the entire decade...Bonds and Griffey would be right there too.

[GM-Carson]

NE- I love debating this stuff too, but it's better to do in person because so much can be lost through translation via the internet (tone, facial expressions, sarcasm, etc.).

[ae]

no question whatsoever that Thomas is a Hall of Famer. I don't care how many games he played at DH, a guy with a .302/.420/.558 (that's the 13th best OPS and 16th best OPS+ in history) career line in well over 8,000 AB is in the Hall.

Mussina reminds me of Jim Bunning; Mussina obviously pitched far fewer innings because of the era he played in, but both were consistently good pitchers with long careers who never put up a truly dominant season. I suspect that he'll make it eventually, especially with his solid postseason resume (3.42 ERA in 139 innings, although only a 7-8 record).

by the way, NEPhilliesPhan, I'm not sure where you're getting that "Park Adjusted ERA" - 4.51 is the average league ERA over his career. Mussina had a 121 ERA+, which means he was substantially better than league average.

[The Theory]

Are some of you seriously arguing against DH players making the hall of fame? Really? That is as bad as the unspoken consensus that relief pitchers aren't worthy either. Hey, I've got a thing against managers, how dare they be considered for the hall of fame! All they do is sit on their toosh and eat sunflower seeds.

[J. Weitzel]

Bunning came to mind, too, in regards to Mussina. He'll make it for sure because he's a Yankee.

[ae]

no real comparison at all between Moyer and Mussina...

3620 IP / 3423 IP
236 - 181 / 258 - 148
4.22 ERA / 3.71 ERA
105 ERA+ / 121 ERA+
1.32 WHIP / 1.19 WHIP
3 Black Ink / 14 Black Ink
98 Gray Ink / 237 Gray Ink
33 HOF Standards / 51 HOF Standards
47 HOF Monitor / 114 HOF Monitor
(see for explanation)

[jeremy]

Frank Thomas' career OPS is .979. This is 13th all time. His career OPS+ is 157, 19th all time. Every person ahead of him on both lists is in the hall, will be in the hall, or had a shortened career. Frank Thomas has hit 520 home runs. His career batting line is .302/.420/.558. This should end the discussion with regards to whether or not Frank Thomas is a hall of famer, but somehow I know it won't.

[JD]

Bed Beard---"I guess my post above is basically NEPhilliephan" "is ___ a HOFer Yes or no". Occasionally, you can take a closer look at eras/stats and realize someone might deserve it, but otherwise, you should know."

Not saying this is right, but might that have something to do with who the eligible players are in any given year?

[Brian G]

I always liked and respected Smoltz too. Probably because, unlike Maddux and Glavine, he dominated us without getting 6 inches on each side of the plate.

[Tray]

Theory, I think you can make a case against baseball managers.

[NEPhilliesPhan]

****by the way, NEPhilliesPhan, I'm not sure where you're getting that "Park Adjusted ERA" - 4.51 is the average league ERA over his career. Mussina had a 121 ERA+, which means he was substantially better than league average****

From Baseball Reference's website for Moose (http://www.baseball-reference.com/m/mussimi01.shtml). If you look at his park-adjusted, league-adjusted stats, he's not that great...he was very good, better than average for sure but not a HoF.

[NEPhilliesPhan]

****no real comparison at all between Moyer and Mussina...****

I was making the point that we can't say "So and so is a HoF because they have 260 wins or 250 wins..." not that Moyer is of the same level of Mussina.

[ae]

NEPhilliesPhan: you are misunderstanding Baseball-Reference. the column "*lgERA" (which is where you're seeing the 4.51) is the ERA for "a league average pitcher in that ballpark or combination of ballparks" (see). that is not Mussina's "park-adjusted, league-adjusted stats."

Mussina has a 121 (park-adjusted, league-adjusted) ERA+. that is better than, by my count, 31 Hall of Fame pitchers, including Jim Bunning, Steve Carlton, Catfish Hunter, Fergie Jenkins, Gaylord Perry, Robin Roberts, Nolan Ryan, Warren Spahn, and Don Sutton.

now clearly the question is more complicated than just ERA+; I'm certainly not suggesting that Mussina is a better pitcher than Carlton was. but to pretend that Mussina's career has been "not that great" is just to ignore reality.

[ae]

I was making the point that we can't say "So and so is a HoF because they have 260 wins or 250 wins..." not that Moyer is of the same level of Mussina.

well, obviously. which is why I listed a number of other statistics that I think show why Mussina has a serious case for the Hall...

[bay_area_phan]

The discussion about Mussina harkens back to yesterday's discussion about the importance of longevity in assessing greatness. At no point in his career would you have ever named Mike Mussina, if you were making a list of the best pitchers in baseball. But he has certainly been a very good pitcher for a very long time. That formula got Don Sutton into the HOF, and it may get Mussina there. Whether it SHOULD get them there is another question. To me, the HOF is for players who were dominant, not players who were merely very good for a long time.

[CJ]

Since I didn't see it mentioned...

Smoltz is opting for season-ending shoulder surgery but would like to return in 2009. This wasn't a retirement announcement... although, realistically speaking, he may never pitch again.

[NEPhilliesPhan]

NEPhilliesPhan: you are misunderstanding Baseball-Reference. the column "*lgERA" (which is where you're seeing the 4.51) is the ERA for "a league average pitcher in that ballpark or combination of ballparks" (see). that is not Mussina's "park-adjusted, league-adjusted stats."

Oops...I wondering why that was so off. I don't often use that website...hence the confusion.

[NEPhilliesPhan]

ae: now clearly the question is more complicated than just ERA+; I'm certainly not suggesting that Mussina is a better pitcher than Carlton was. but to pretend that Mussina's career has been "not that great" is just to ignore reality.

How so? He's never won 20 games, he's never won a Cy Young (he only really came close 1 time), His stats don't scream "HoF pitcher". They say he is a very good pitcher and has stayed fairly healthy. That doesn't make him a HoF.

[CJ]

And on other topics...

Frank Thomas is a first-ballot Hall of Famer. He was both dominant for a stretch and he's shown the longevity necessary to put up those big stats. This isn't in doubt.

Mike Mussina may get into the Hall, and I think I'd like to see him there. I was a bit of an O's fan growing up in York, PA and always liked him.

[Sophist]

clout - in defense of the Beerleaguer consensus: the calls for Happ died down a few weeks ago before Eaton had three good starts in a row (2-1, 19.2 IP, 15 H, 5 ER, 2 BB (!), 11 SO, .217 BAA) and Myers, while not being as strong, seems to possibly be moving in the right direction (7 shutout innings after giving up 3 in the first.)

Eaton has looked good, but there was a stretch this year (April 19th to May 17th) when his ERA was 6.59 and his OPS against was .909

[AWH the RBP]

bap, Robin Yount is a player who comes to mind who was very good for a long time, even got 3,000 hits, but many people believe does not belong in the Hall.

Phil Rizzuto, Red Schoendienst....the list is pretty long.

IMO, they ought to do away with the veterans committee entirely. Too political.

On Smoltz, my question is: What does this do to the Braves chances in 2008?

Personally, I hated seeing him on the mound against the Phillies. The numbers bear that out, though his 13-13 record against is not really an indication of how well he pitched against the Phils.

[CJ]

NEP: It's not so simple that we can say, "He hasn't won 20, he's not a Hall of Famer." Wins are merely one component of a pitcher's stats. There just aren't as many 20 game winners as their used to be (5-man rotations, lower pitch counts, greater use of bullpens, etc.). And if you want to talk wins, are you suggesting 258 wins aren't significant? His average season is 17-9. He also won 19 twice and 18 twice.

Sure, he hasn't won a Cy Young. That's a strike against him, but he was in the top 5 in Cy Young voting 5 times in his career and was runner-up once. He was in the top-5 in ERA eight times. And in the top-10 in WHIP nine times. His career K/BB ratio is 12th all time!

Again, I'm not saying he's a first-ballot HOFer... nor am I saying he's a lock. But I think you're getting too caught up in things he can't control... like not getting 20 wins. For his best 9 years, he was a member of an Orioles team that finished 1st or 2nd just 3 times. The O's weren't real good. If they had been better, he probably earns himself at least a couple 20 win seasons and maybe a Cy Young, too.

[AWH the RBP]

His nickname was "Lefty", but he was one of many LH pitchers in the major leagues during his career, yet everyone knew who was being spoken about when he was referred to.

Another guy's nickname was the Iron Horse. Everyone knew who he was also.

'George Herman' had a nickname that everyone knew him by.

I submit to you that any player who can earn a nickname like "The Big Hurt" ...................

[Dan]

The other players on a HoF ballot in a given year shouldn't affect a candidate's chances. (Shouldn't, not won't.) The players are not in competition with each other; the HoF is not constrained to picking only, say, five players (or fewer), like the NFL does. That said, many voters take it upon themselves to vote only for some and not for others, even if they feel those others are just as worthy. That's why you see the "won't get in on the first ballot" junk; it's because many voters are lazy and dumb.

[CJ]

Don't look now, but Adam Eaton's ERA+ this year is up to 95.

Oh... and Pedro Feliz is back to making an out more than 7 out of every 10 at bats (.295 OBP). After his impossible-to-maintain hot streak, he's now just 4 for the last 27.

[Jack]

If Glavine, Maddux, Smoltz, Randy Johnson we all to retire this year, it would be pretty amazing to see who makes it in on the first ballot. I think Pedro hangs on for another couple years, but if he were to retire, that would just add to it. Also, consider that it will most likely be the 2nd year of eligbility for Bonds and Clemens. It's entirely possible that writers will punish these two for their "indescretions" by not allowing them in on their first try. That would set up a potential Hall of Fame class of 3 of the top 15 pitchers of all-time and one of the best hitters of all-time. Plus Glavine and Smoltz as well. Pretty interesting stuff.

[Bedrosian's Beard]

"Bed Beard---"I guess my post above is basically NEPhilliephan" "is ___ a HOFer Yes or no". Occasionally, you can take a closer look at eras/stats and realize someone might deserve it, but otherwise, you should know."

Not saying this is right, but might that have something to do with who the eligible players are in any given year? " Could be. I'd also say: If there's nobody Hall worthy in a given year, you elect nobody, not someone just so you can.

[Sophist]

CJ - speaking of ERA+, Edinson Volquez' is 305, according to BP.com "the best mark in history for all starting pitchers who have thrown at least 60 innings in a season."

[NEPhilliesPhan]

****Sure, he hasn't won a Cy Young. That's a strike against him, but he was in the top 5 in Cy Young voting 5 times in his career and was runner-up once. He was in the top-5 in ERA eight times. And in the top-10 in WHIP nine times. His career K/BB ratio is 12th all time!****

All of that makes him very good...but not a HoF. He never had a truly dominant run...he was very good several times though. That isn't what I think of when I think of a Hall of Famer. By this same measure a guy like Jim Edmonds isn't a Hall of Famer...he's got a bunch of GG, very good stats in his peak, etc but he wasn't never the best at his position. Moose has never been the best pitcher in all of baseball...he has been a top 5 guy a few times but it was never "Crap Moose is pitching tonight" like you would get with Pedro Martinez or Smoltz etc. He played for some very very good teams which helped him immensely with his win total. If he played for mediocre teams his whole career and had 220 wins right now, we wouldn't even be having this discussion.

[Casey]

Definitely a good crop coming up. Just for fun, here's how I'd rank the pitchers

1. Maddux
2. Pedro
3. Johnson
4. Smoltz
5. Glavine

I'm not sure what to think about Clemens now, but at one time he would have taken the top slot there, just a little bit above Maddux.

[RSB]

What does this news do for the Braves' chances? Well, it surely can't help. But one reason why I would never count the Braves out - in fact, why I believe they will easily present the most problems in the East for the Phillies - is because they are always capable, due to their perpetually deep farm system, of swinging a mid-season impact trade and filling their needs. Smoltz has been the bellwether for them, of course, but stars have come and gone from that team and still they succeed because of the stability in the front office. The Braves have been extremely good at home, for whatever reason, and it will be interesting to see if the Phillies, hot as they've been, can win the series there this weekend.

If we're harkening back to yesterday's discussions, I still have a case to make against bay areas fan's contention that pre-integration baseball was on a level comparable to what minor league competition is today - and correct me if I'm wrong, BAP, but that's what you seemed to be implying. I absolutely won't dispute the fact that integration alone has elevated the overall level of talent from what it had been in the early 20th century, but I think you take the argument a bit too far. Some disadvantages the players had in those days were playing day games all the time and taking long train trips, which had to wear on production. The amenities and conditions at ballparks and playing fields weren't what they are now; neither were advanced training methods and exercise facilities. Players often could not afford to not play hurt. There are many reasons why it's not really appropriate to slight the achievements of older ballpayers in comparison to what players of latter eras have done. It's ultimately not possible to suggest the circumstances were level, but different sets of advantages and disadvantages in all time periods have existed. We can adjust performance evaluation to reflect these circumstances, but ultimately there is no reason to believe that the best players from 1925 couldn't have played at a similarly high level in 1965 or 2005, or vice versa.

[NEPhilliesPhan]

This will probably piss some off but I consider Curt Schilling to be a HoF but not Mike Mussina. Being the ultimate clutch guy in the playoffs might have something to do with that though.

Statistically I'm sure you can argue that Moose was the better pitcher in many ways, but Schill got it done when it mattered.

[NEPhilliesPhan]

On pre-integration...we cannot denigrate the careers of guys like Ruth, Cobb, and Hornsby simply because of the era they played in. We have to compare them to their era not to modern day playres...the same as if comparring Mantle to a current CF instead of his 1950/60's equivalent.

[RSB]

Mussina's a guy who, if he gets in at all, would be the sort who's elected in 40 years by some committee. He's been an above average pitcher, very seldom dominant, and his best years by and large came before he wore pinstripes. Schilling may have similar career numbers but he's been far more of a presence in baseball, a time-tested big-game and post-season winner who has been dominant (and who racked up the k's) over an extended period - I think he would have a much better chance to get in a lot sooner than Mussina.

[NEPhilliesPhan]

Schilling finished 2nd in the Cy Young voting 4 times (to other probable HoFers)...Moose only once. His peak was much higher than Moose.

[CJ]

Well, we can each have our own measure. By yours, any OF who's best years came during Barry Bonds career likely won't get into the Hall because he wasn't the best OF in the game at the time.

To me, a guy who had an 8 year stretch (1992-99) in which he went 132-61 (avg. 16.5-7.5) with ERA+'s of 129-163 in 6 of those 8 years is a pretty dominant stretch. Again, he played on an Orioles team that was pretty bad most of those years.

The three best AL starters over that stretch were Randy Johnson, Roger Clemens and Mike Mussina. RJ got Cy Young votes in 4 of those 8 years (including 1 win), the steroid-fueled Rocket got Cy Young votes in 3 of those 8 years (including 2 wins, likely post-steroids) and Mussina got Cy Young votes in 6 of those 8 years.

It's not unreasonable to suggest that over that 8 year period, Mike Mussina was the AL's best pitcher.

[Casey]

This article is behind a subscriber wall, but in it Dan Fox uses the performance of pitchers at the plate to measure the overall difficulty of the league. He reasons that hitting and pitching have progressed more or less evenly over time, but since pitchers are not selected for their hitting, then the average pitcher in 2000 should be able to hit about as well as the average pitcher in 1900. So if the 1900 pitcher hit .250 and the 2000 pitcher hit .150, then the overall level of competition has become 40% more difficult. This is a major simplification on the article, but I thought it was a fascinating and innovative way to measure how the league has changed.

[NEPhilliesPhan]

CJ: Well, we can each have our own measure. By yours, any OF who's best years came during Barry Bonds career likely won't get into the Hall because he wasn't the best OF in the game at the time

Yes...that is exactly what I'm saying...Seriously though, Moose does not deserve the Hall. You can massage his stats all you want but he was never that dominant.

[mm]

I don't see how Schilling doesn't make the hall. If his bloody sock made it in, he surely will as well.

Heck, even if he had even if he had mediocre numbers, his performance in 2004 post-season alone secured him his spot in the hall(especially considering he was playing for the Red Sox.

I don't expect Smoltz to come back. He may not be ready yet to say he is retiring, but the writing is on the wall. I agree with many of the other posters that while he was playing for the enemy, he was the one player of there's who i had the utmost respect for a player and a person(David Justice always seemed like a class act as well).

Now Chipper(Larry), thats another story...

[Sophist]

Some other random notes:

The Marlins, who are playing the Braves at the moment, are 13-1 this year against the Nationals and Brewers. They are 18-25 against everybody else.

The Cubs are 16-2 against the NL West. They are 9-3 against Pittsburgh. They are 13-16 against everyone else.

The Phils have played 18 games against the NL East, fewer than any other team in the division. The next lowest is FL at 25; the highest is the Mets at 30.

[CJ]

NEP: "You can massage his stats all you want but he was never that dominant."

That's the difficulty in discussing the Hall, each having their own measure. You pretty much admit there that he was dominant to a degree... but not "that" dominant enough to get in the Hall. You require even more of something to be considered dominant enough. I think being the best pitcher in a league over an 8 year stretch is dominant enough for me. And had he been on a better team, I'm fairly certain he'd have a few 20-win seasons and perhaps a Cy Young or two.

[AWH the RBP]

Casey, I disagree. Years ago I never thought Clemens was as good as Maddux. As a matter of fact, most sportswriters didn't think so either, when they were both at their peaks. SI had an article back in the mid-'90s calling Maddux the best RHP in 75 years - that meant since Walter Johnson.

Without the late career surge (similar to Bonds' late career power surge) Clemens wouldn't even be in the same discussion as Maddux. I'll let you decide how Roger was able to defy age after the age of 33, and whether you think his career up to that age equaled that of Maddux.

As far as Edinson Volquez is concerned, I'll put 2+2 together:

CJ says Pete Happy is just 4 for his last 27, and there is a nasty RHP on the mound for Cincy tonight:

It's time for Dobbs to get a start if his back is healthy enough.

[J. Weitzel]

Sophist: Are those your own figures? If so, I'd like to post them.

[NEPhilliesPhan]

That's the difficulty in discussing the Hall, each having their own measure. You pretty much admit there that he was dominant to a degree... but not "that" dominant enough to get in the Hall.

I'll be completely honest and say I think he was a very very good player for a long time but he never had that one "WOW" season that I would expect out of a HoF. Having one awesome season doesnt automatically make you a HoF, but not ever having it should pretty much disqualify you. He was very good and had a nice run in the 90's of #1 pitching but he was never of the, "No I cant go out tonight cause Moose is pitching and I want to watch" that I would get from somebody like Pedro, Schilling, Maddux, Clemens (hate him now), R. Johnson, etc. He always belonged in that just below greatness tier below those guys. Because of that I dont see him as a HoF.

[mm]

On an unrelated note: Assuming that no teams picks up bonds this year(and considering it is now June, it seems highly doubtful that it will happen), I believe the Giants offering to Sign him for a Day and retiring him in SF opening day of 2009.

I also think that Bud Selig should personally be there to take part and publicly shake his hand.

For all that can Harped onto Bonds, for being a cheat, he is "The" cheat. He is the PR Spin for the entire game. He is the Shoeless Joe. He is the one who, while yes, committed the sin, is the one taking the blame for every other player who cheated in the 80's and 90's. There are others of course, Canseco comes to mind, but Canseco utimatley did not provide any history to the game. Bonds did. And what angered me most about the entire steroids fiasco, is that Baseball as an organization refused to take any responsibility for what was happening right under their noses, and to me, it is that very refusal that implies guilt.

He is a cheat. But baseball owes him on some level.

[Sophist]

JW - The W-L figures I got from ESPN.com. On the standings page there are links div vs. div W-L and Team vs. Team expanded.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/standings/grid

The Cubs recent run has come at the expense of the NL West. It started May 26th against the Dodgers, then 4 games against the Rockies, and 2 more against the Padres. They have 4 more games against the Dodgers before they have to play the Braves.

[Sophist]

Oh, and I was wrong about the Mets having the most NL East games. The Nats have played in the division 32 times.

[Sophist]

The Phils are 9-9 against the East. They have a winning record against everybody else.

[Sophist]

JW - I didn't find them in somebody else's writing, if that's what you mean. I just read them off the standings.

[NEPhilliesPhan]

pretty sure that' what he meant Sophist...no copyright infringement issues from posting them at that point.

[Sophist]

NEPP - Just being clear.

[Casey]

AWH, I actually agree. It was for a short time in this decade that I put Clemens up there with and maybe just ahead of Maddux. Knowing what we now know, Maddux is comfortably alone at the top, and I put him up there with Walter Johnson as well. On that note, I think Randy Johnson is the best lefty since Lefty Grove -- no offense to Carlton.

[BENTZ]

The Phils went 5-0 against Colorado this year...that sure would have been nice last October...

[NEPhilliesPhan]

Johnson in his prime was completely unhittable. I never saw Carlton pitch so I couldn't say how great he was...his statistics are very very impressive though.

[AWH the RBP]

Casey, I'm not sure I agree with the premise behind Fox's assertion.

The game has changed so much since 1900 - players have become so much more specialized, especially the relief pitchers - that I don't think you can make a valid comparison between 1900 and today. Pitchers in 1900 were probably EXPECTED to be better hitters than they are today, and consequently worked on it more, because they weren't pulled for pinch hitters anywhere near as often. I suspect they were probably motivated to be better hitters as well, because they knew they might get up in a late game situation with the game on the line.

He really has to make the case that today's pitchers's aren't as good in terms of their all around athleticism as they pitchers in 1900. I find that notion preposterous.

To show you how much the game has changed and become so much more specialized, look at it this way:

In that era, Cy Young had 749 COMPLETE GAMES. In a 20-year career, averaging 34 GS/yr and not missing a start, a SP today wouldn't even START 749 times.

My point is "overally difficulty" is too ambiguous a term to accurately measure - at least not the way Fox tries to.

[AWH the RBP]

"Having one awesome season doesnt automatically make you a HoF, but not ever having it should pretty much disqualify you."

NEPP, I actually am compelled to agree with the above.

NEPP and Casey, I've never compared Carlton or Johnson statistically, but having seen them both pitch at their peaks I would rate them "neck and neck" in the dominance department. They were both virtually unhittable.

Carlton, or course, won and lost more games than Johnson, and was much more of a 'horse', having logged 1300 more IP and completed 156 more games. Johnson has the higher Winning %.

[Casey]

He really has to make the case that today's pitchers's aren't as good in terms of their all around athleticism as they pitchers in 1900.

I don't follow.

[joe l]

Best wishes for Smoltzy. Worst case scenario he retires, finishes raising his kids and comes back to MLB as a pitching coach. Either way he has my respect and he's a 1st ballot HOF'er in my book.