The Launch Angle

When we move out of the current era then we move back to an order or operations that make sense. First, we look at the Hall of Fame pitchers from the period. The general idea is that we will eventually find a sweet spot (median or mean) where Hall of Fame pitchers should probably be. We can also identify outliers on the positive and negative end.

Most eras will have a similar number of pitchers as positions have players in the Hall of Fame. The period between 1980 and 2000 is a little different for a variety of reasons. Some players pitched in the era but are classified in the era before it. Others dominated but had other factors that kept them out of the Hall of Fame. We of course will get to those when we look at the outside looking in next time around.

Our methodology is more or less the same. Next time we will look at the top pitchers on the outside looking in so we can identify the two most qualified applicants for enshrinement. However, we have to go through this exercise first. We must establish a realistic standard before we can make that call.

As per usual, we will look at the index, sabermetric pitching numbers, awards voting, and playoff performance. There is one clear outlier on the negative end we will spend some time on and a few on the upper end. That leaves four guys that are pretty tightly grouped as a viable standard for Hall of Fame excellence.

HOF Pitchers 1980-2000

I say this every time because I always have new readers: the index was never meant to rank order players. I am not suggesting that the Big Unit was better than Maddux. These numbers represent a fit for Cooperstown. That can seem very similar, but numerous folks that are smarter than me can poke holes in the mathematics involved. The key to any good analysis is knowing the limitations of said analysis. The index is designed to put players into similar groups so that we can use other methods to compare them.

Johnson and Maddux have very few peers. When we include Pedro Martinez we see three guys we could classify as positive outliers. The idea is that we shouldn’t compare applicants to them. Those applicants will come up short. We will ultimately compare any applicant with those four in the middle. Jack Morris obviously comes in as a negative outlier.

I used to classify Morris as a mistake. In my hard of hearts I still believe that, but it is much more appropriate to call him an outlier. What that means is that we should not use him as a source for comparison with future applicants. It leaves open the possibility that other factors outside of numbers demanded his enshrinement, but it cannot be justified through numbers. We will see that later on.

HOF Pitching Numbers

One of my more intelligent commenters pointed out that almost all of these numbers can be found at baseball-reference.com and that there are more sophisticated and appropriate numbers available elsewhere. I have no doubt on that. We are comparing like pitchers and this is just one of the tests that we use. Bases per out (BPO) does not have a direct source. I did not invent it, but I have yet to find a source that keeps track of it, so I do it by hand.

It measures damage allowed in a more sophisticated way than OPS against. It is calculated by adding total bases, stolen bases, walks, and hit by pitchesand dividing it by total outs. It does not prove anything by itself and it is not normed for specific eras or home ballparks, but we can see Pedro is a step above the rest and Morris comes in the rear by a significant margin.

The neutral wins (NW), weighted average adjusted percentage (waaPCT), and quality starts percentage all show that he was an above average pitcher for a very long time. That absolutely has value. Durability plays. Consistency plays. However, it is far cry from being solid to being a Hall of Fame pitcher. This test doesn’t prove anything. It is just additional evidence that the voters missed the mark. We need to look at the awards voting next.

Pitcher Awards Voting

What this aims to do is compare how a player was viewed when he played with how he actually performed. It isn’t a perfect metric. It relies primarily on BWAR which has flaws, but it is yet another test and another way of expressing the data in a way that will give each player dimension. For instance, we know Roy Halladay wasn’t quite as good as the others in terms of longevity, but these numbers show he was very impactful in the time he did pitch.

First place votes get ten points, top five votes get five points, top ten votes get three points, and top 25 votes get one point. The last category represents the number of times the pitcher led the league in BWAR. It obviously isn’t a requirement to ever be the best in a single season, but it is a feather in your cap and another piece of evidence on your behalf.

It shouldn’t be a surprise that Morris was overvalued in his career. In this time period, Cy Young voters valued wins and Morris won more games than any pitcher in the 1980s. Voters are now more sophisticated and they know that a lot of things goes into winning or losing a game. Glavine and Martinez had the good fortune of playing on some good teams over the years.

Those that want to point to Johnson as being the best in this group would point to these numbers here. He deserved six Cy Young awards. As we will see, he probably doesn’t claim the top spot overall, but there are some humongous issues there that complicate any analysis.

HOF Playoff Numbers

This is where things get a little too esoteric for my tastes. We leave the analytical and move to the philosophical. How much do these numbers really matter? I can’t answer that in any kind of systematic or satisfying way. For those in favor of Morris, they will point to Game 7 of the 1991 World Series where he threw a ten inning shutout to clinch the World Series for the Twins.

You could argue that game saved baseball in the Twin Cities. It was definitely one of the more iconic performances in World Series history. Roy Halladay threw a no-hitter in the World Series in 2010. One could argue that if these pitchers were borderline candidates then those performances should throw them over the top.

Of course, I would counter by suggesting that neither were borderline candidates. Halladay was easily in and Morris shouldn’t have been. In point of fact, Smoltz is probably the one that should stand out the most because he was consistently excellent in the playoffs. Still, when you look at ERA you see there is actually not a whole lot separating these pitchers. That’s not normal but it is indicative that postseason performance probably shouldn’t be that much of a factor.

Originally published in Thoughts from A Native Texan on June 14, 2026. Feature photo by SD Dirk, Creative Commons License.