The Jon Heyman twitter thread

[Goober]

Heyman had some terrible football related tweets today, but this made me laugh:

Miller Park Drunk ‏@millerparkdrunk

You are so fucking stupid RT @JonHeymanCBS: gets confusing when washington runs ball back for seattle (wash.) vs. washington

 

[Goober]

Joe Sheehan ‏@joe_sheehan
@SagebrushSam This is what's frustrating. Trammell should be getting Morris' support. Whitaker. Hell, Evans.

Jon HeymanVerified ‏@JonHeymanCBS
@d2mart @joe_sheehan do you also not believe lasting 8 IPs or more in 52 pct of starts over 14 straight yrs is impressive?

Joe Sheehan ‏@joe_sheehan
. @JonHeymanCBS Ten years ago, 11 years after Game Seven, Morris was a non-candidate. His vote total is a tantrum against progress.

Joe Sheehan ‏@joe_sheehan
. @JonHeymanCBS When have "Opening Day starts" and "percentage of eight-inning starts" ever been used to evaluate anyone, ever?

"@joe_sheehan: If the SECOND SENTENCE in your case for a guy for the Hall is "Opening Day starts", stop writing."

I believe Sheehan deleted that last tweet.

Heyman's HOF article on Morris:

2. Jack Morris: He defined workhorse and ace in the '80s and early '90s, yet he remains as controversial a non-steroid candidate as there is. He made 14 Opening Day starts, tied with Steve Carlton, Randy Johnson, Walter Johnson and Cy Young for second most ever, behind only Tom Seaver, and was also the No. 1 pitcher of three World Series winners, clear evidence of his reputation and impact in his day. Tom Verducci of Sports Illustrated had the stat that defines him: in 14 consecutive seasons, he pitched eight innings or more in 52 percent of his starts. Detractors point to a less-than-glowing career 3.90 ERA, but his career is better summarized by a great decade (most wins of the '80s) and great moments (his Game 7 performance in 1991 for his hometown Minnesota Twins was maybe the best pitching performance under the circumstances in decades). He was good enough to receive Cy Young votes in seven seasons. I can't allow his vast accomplishments to be re-evaluated downward by a new emphasis on different numbers.

 

[FedEx227]

Heyman showed his ass all night. It's an awful article on all levels. His defense of players makes no sense, he didn't do proper research and he just acted like a total moron.

http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2...ts-get-in-his-way-in-order-to-make-it-happen/

:59 PM: Jon Heyman put up his Hall of Fame column this afternoon. For years he has pushed hard for Jack Morris for the Hall. He has long overstated Morris’ merits in my view, but it’s gotten to the point now where he’s simply making crap up:

He was thought good enough to be the ace on teams that had Bert Blyleven and Dave Stewart, and to receive Cy Young votes in seven seasons. I can’t allow his vast accomplishments to be re-evaluated downward by a new emphasis on different numbers.

Jack Morris and Bert Blyleven were never teammates. Jack Morris played one season with Dave Stewart. In that one season — 1993 — Morris was 7-12 with a 6.19 ERA. It’s possible that Heyman is calling Morris the “ace” of that 1993 Jays team because he got the Opening Day start, but he didn’t distinguish himself at all that year, he was out of the rotation by early September and was left off the postseason roster. Some ace.

 

[ThomasTomasz]

14 Opening Day starts :jonesy:

I didn't realize that was an official stat

 

[FedEx227]

It's not. Nobody cares.

 

[ThomasTomasz]

It's not. Nobody cares.

I know. Sarcasm. Hence the :jonesy:

 

[FedEx227]

No, I know. It's just pathetic that THOSE are the type of people voting.

I also don't think 54% of your starts going over 8 innings is anything anyone should ever give a shit about.

 

[ThomasTomasz]

No, I know. It's just pathetic that THOSE are the type of people voting.

I also don't think 54% of your starts going over 8 innings is anything anyone should ever give a shit about.

I think in today's game, that would be something to point out. However, the bullpen's in Morris' time didn't have the "specialists" you see in today's game and the chess matches managers tend to have with each other, so pitchers were expected to pitch late into games.

I wouldn't be surprised if Heyman was drinking when he wrote that.

 

[FedEx227]

It doesn't matter anyway because it's not like he was particularly good when teams were peddling him out there for 8 innings. His ERA kinda shows that, that's why we have that statistic and numerous others. I mean, Livan Hernandez isn't good because he pitches a ton of innings. He gets a lot of jobs, but I don't think anyone would confuse him with a top-tier pitcher, he's just a workhorse.

 

[ThomasTomasz]

It doesn't matter anyway because it's not like he was particularly good when teams were peddling him out there for 8 innings. His ERA kinda shows that, that's why we have that statistic and numerous others. I mean, Livan Hernandez isn't good because he pitches a ton of innings. He gets a lot of jobs, but I don't think anyone would confuse him with a top-tier pitcher, he's just a workhorse.

Morris was pretty good, just not great. HOF shouldn't be for a player like that, but we seem to be making it out to be for whatever reason, probably because Morris was pretty candid with some members of the media or something stupid like that.

 

[FedEx227]

Morris was fine, but so was Ellis Burks. I'm not saying he was awful, but as I've said in previous posts, if you let him in he instantly becomes one of the five worst Hall of Famers ever.

The bigger problem is, we have a subset of writers who, when they were covering Morris didn't feel he was one of the best pitchers in the game, now suddenly lauding him as being one of the best pitchers in the game.

 

[ThomasTomasz]

Morris was fine, but so was Ellis Burks. I'm not saying he was awful, but as I've said in previous posts, if you let him in he instantly becomes one of the five worst Hall of Famers ever.

The bigger problem is, we have a subset of writers who, when they were covering Morris didn't feel he was one of the best pitchers in the game, now suddenly lauding him as being one of the best pitchers in the game.

Which is really weird when you think about it.......what has he done to change their minds since then?

 

[FedEx227]

Bloggers started using statistics.

It's one of my biggest gripes with the Hall of Fame. There shouldn't really be a period of hemming and hawing over a guy. Is he a Hall of Famer or not? The only time it works positively is when more people investigate and really look into Tim Raines, but there's also the inverse that we've seen with a lot of guys gaining support just because people feel bad for them or lie to themselves about their impact because they were nice guys.

 

[NAHSTE]

@JonHeymanCBS

new system works better. but must question fairness in some cases. laroche, nats mvp, got $24M/2. e-jax, mediocre, $52M/4

@JonHeymanCBS Or, it simply shows that teams value young pitching more than aging first baseman.

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

There is something to be said about 54% of your starts going 8+ innings, in terms of saving the bullpen, etc. It is pretty impressive. But if it's one of the first things that comes up in your Hall of Fame defense, you have a weak case.

Plus, consider this about the "workhorse" when you put him into the context of his era. Despite all of those long starts...

-Morris only led the league in innings pitched once
-Morris only led the league in CG's once
-Morris only led the league in shutouts once
-Morris only led the league in strikeouts once
-Morris only led the league in wins twice

In fact, Morris only led the league in batter's faced one time. So when matched against his peers, Morris doesn't seem to be the amazing workhorse that people make him out to be. The only area where he stood above his peers, even when it comes to "workhorsey things", is that he didn't miss a start for over a decade, and was literally never injured for 18 years.

So what does that 54% number mean? Not much. Clearly there were guys doing similar things, because Morris barely ever led the league in any of the "workhorse" categories.

 

[FedEx227]

And again, that's what's so stupid about this Morris championing. He wasn't THAT good relative to his era. So much so that the very people that are saying "HE WAS SO GREAT WHEN WE COVERED THE GAME!" couldn't be bothered to vote him for any major baseball awards during this dominating period.

 

[NAHSTE]

Someone at work just argued for Jack Morris because he is the only SP to pitch his entire career in the AL during the DH era.

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

Someone at work just argued for Jack Morris because he is the only SP to pitch his entire career in the AL during the DH era.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/g/guidrro01.shtml

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/s/stiebda01.shtml

Two off the top of my head. I'm sure there are a few others.

The first guy was no question better than Morris, but had a short career.

The second guy is actually a pretty decent comp to Morris, although again, shorter career and Morris was probably a little better.

The point is, neither sniffed the HOF, and Morris isnt significantly better than either, if he's better at all.

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

How about this guy? Just thought of this one, too. Throw him at your co-workers who clearly have no memory.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/k/keyji01.shtml

Another great Morris comp, and this guy even has the postseason resume that writers love, too.

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

Highest HOF voting totals for those three players:

Guidry - 8.8%
Stieb - 1.4%
Key - 0.6%