Roy Halladay Retires

[revo]

Wow, that's pretty surprising! He wasn't nearly the same pitcher he once was, but I thought he had a couple of decent years left in the tank.

[Judge Jude]

He's a different breed of cat, so I'm not surprised, and I mean that as a great compliment.

Nobody started off worse and got so much better; would like to see him get in the Hall...

updated active Wins Leaders

Rank Player (yrs, age) Wins Throws
1. Tim Hudson (15, 37) 205 R
CC Sabathia (13, 32) 205 L
3. Bartolo Colon (16, 40) 189 R
4. Mark Buehrle (14, 34) 186 L
5. Derek Lowe (17, 40) 176 R
6. Barry Zito (14, 35) 165 L
7. Roy Oswalt (13, 35) 163 R
8. Freddy Garcia (15, 36) 156 R
9. A.J. Burnett (15, 36) 147 R
10. Cliff Lee (12, 34) 139 L
Johan Santana (12, 34) 139 L
12. Bronson Arroyo (14, 36) 138 R
John Lackey (11, 34) 138 R
14. Justin Verlander (9, 30) 137 R
15. Josh Beckett (13, 33) 132 R
Ryan Dempster (16, 36) 132 R
Jake Peavy (12, 32) 132 R

pitching is hard

[Don Quixote]

Not sure if I'd vote Halladay in. I think I'd lean toward "no" but would have to give it some more thought.

I'd have to consider the era in which he pitched. I'm kind of neutral as of now. One thing's certain--For a number of years, he was the kind of pitcher you built your fantasy staff around if you went the "Stars and OK guys" route.

[Pogues]

I don't think Halladay makes the Hall, at least not with the BBWAA. He is coming in right at the beginning of a new era of pitchers, where win totals won't be as high, important for the knuckleheads, lower IP, lower K, and so forth compared to Clemens, Johnson, Maddux, and even Pedro. If the pitching trend continues as it is, similar players like Halladay will have a better shot, on the basis of some of those starting pitchers from the era will need to be inducted, but his overlap with the greats will hurt him tremendously.

I just think it'll be a lack of recognition for Halladay. He might get in, but it'll be after at least 10 years of voting...and the starting pitching trend needs to continue as it has been for the past 10-15 years.

[Moonlight J]

He said his back is a mess and is trying to avoid having vertebrae fused

[Sour Masher]

I think he is a HOFer, but the injuries may cost him his ticket, at least for awhile. He'd be more of a slam dunk if injuries didn't cause his sudden decline and retirement, obviously. But, of course, "if and buts" is an endless game on a lot of players, and I understand small hallers keeping him out. He is not a slam dunk by any stretch with his final stats. But for a good long stretch, he was one of the best, or even arguably THE best pitcher in all of baseball.

I tend to favor guys who were the best for awhile, over guys who were very good for a long time. Although, that too is a skill, represents value, and should be rewarded. It is a balancing act, and limit cases at both extremes always make for interesting discussions. (As an aside, I contrast Halladay with someone like Jamie Moyer, as the other extreme--there was some talk about how he'd have to get in the HOF if he somehow managed to limp past the 300 wins threshold; I understood the value his longevity and consistency brought to the game, but I'm more biased against that sort of player being a HOFer--Halladay is a close call for me, but Moyer never was close to me, even if he had managed 30 more wins).

Obviously, the ideal HOFer is one of the very best for a good long, consistent, durable career. Halladay doesn't fit that mold, but his start burnt so bright at times, I think he should make it.

[virgonomic]

Where is the "Jays sign Halladay" thread?

[Teenwolf]

The fact that you all are debating whether Roy Halladay gets into the Hall Of Fame or not just goes to show what a broken and failed representation of MLB the HOF has become!

Maybe I'm a bit biased, as he's one of the only dominant players I've had the pleasure to watch for most of their career (Doc + Delgado), but Roy Halladay was a shutdown pitcher that piled up a ton of complete games in an era where that wasn't happening anymore. Ultimately, his workhorse mentality probably pushed him past the point of breaking at only 36. He gave his body to the game, and he needs to be in there.

Then again, the HOF list is currently a sh!tshow. No clue how that gets resolved.

Actually, just start up an ASTERISK wing, and open the damn floodgates. Enough with the moral grandstanding, and MLB revisionism. Just honor the damn players that entertained us, whether they doped for a boost or not!

[wannabegriffey]

Just honor the damn players that entertained us, whether they doped for a boost or not!

Yeah, I agree. Put the cheater's in because they, like, didn't diminish and damage the game.

Sigh...

[chancellor]

I don't understand what this means. For me, there are slam-dunk guys like Maddux, Pedro, Clemens, Big Unit that all are shoo-ins. The rest, Mussina, Halladay, Smoltz, Schilling, Kevin Brown, Saberhagen, are all worthy of conversation and maybe even induction for a few but they're no locks.

While I agree with you about Pedro, a lot don't. The only two I see as slam dunks are Maddux and Big Unit.

[Don Quixote]

While I agree with you about Pedro, a lot don't. The only two I see as slam dunks are Maddux and Big Unit.

Someone seriously questions Pedro's being qualified for the Hall?

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/m/martipe02.shtml

Look at his career, look at his numbers in his prime (1997-2005) compiled at the height of the steroids era, look at his "Hall of Fame Statistics" section.

If someone can look at the numbers, tell me he's not qualified, and do it with a straight face, I'll be impressed with that person's acting ability.

[Controller Jacobs]

Totally agree with this post. The biggest reason Halladay gets close to HoF status for me is that he was the best pitcher in all of baseball for a couple years there. I'm still leaning toward "no", though....

More than a couple years.
In the 10-year span from 2002-2011, he was 1st in his league in pitching WAR four times, top 4 eight times. In one of the two years in that span where he wasn't in the top 10, he went 16-7 with 225 IP and a 121 ERA+.

[Controller Jacobs]

Someone seriously questions Pedro's being qualified for the Hall?

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/m/martipe02.shtml

Look at his career, look at his numbers in his prime (1997-2005) compiled at the height of the steroids era, look at his "Hall of Fame Statistics" section.

If someone can look at the numbers, tell me he's not qualified, and do it with a straight face, I'll be impressed with that person's acting ability.

If Pedro is held back, there will hopefully be a sincere push to retire some voters who can't understand some of the new-fangled stats like ERA.

[DMT]

If Pedro is held back, there will hopefully be a sincere push to retire some voters who can't understand some of the new-fangled stats like ERA.

After they denied Piazza, would anyone really be surprised? The entire process has become a cruel joke.

[Controller Jacobs]

Halladay was either the best in baseball or close to it from 2008-2011.

So you really think he wasn't even close to the best in 2002-2003, when he lead the AL in IP and was 5th in ERA/ERA+?
One could argue Pedro was the best those two years, but Halladay's workhorseness resulted having 505 IP acress those two years, compared to Pedro's 385. And Toronto really needed those innings - their other starters stunk (3 starters with an era above 5 both years)