Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball

In rec.sport.baseball, glb50263@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Gary L. Blickhan) writes:

> 1)Fingers is already in the Hall of Fame.  A Sporting News poll of baseball
> writers concluded that Eckersley's chances are about "even money."

Lloyd Waner is already in the hall of fame, too.  Bill Mazeroski is not.
What's your point?

> 2)Fingers won the Cy Young award ***and*** the AL MVP in 1981, making him
> the first pitcher to win both in the same year.  (Willie Hernandez did it
> in 1984, but his name is not in this discussion.)  Eckersley has not won
> either award once.

Fingers didn't have to pitch during the prime of Roger Clemens, either.

> 3)Fingers led the majors in saves three times (1977,1978,1981).  Eckersley
> has only done that once.

Fingers was a full time reliever for what, over 10 years?  Eck only 4.

> 4)Fingers has the all-time record for saves. (341)   Eckersley had 188 at
> the end of 1991.

See above.
 
> 5)In three World Series apiece, Eckersley did hardly anything.
> 1988- 0 wins, 1 loss, 10.8 ERA.  He was the goat.
> 1989- 1 save in 1 2/3 innings. 0 ERA.  Pretty good.
> 1990- 0 wins, 1 loss, 6.75 ERA.  0 Saves.  Not good.

Translation: in a *very* small sample space, Eck got unlucky.

Note of course it would have been pretty darn difficult to earn any other saves
in any of those years.  Consider that, aside from the appearances credited
above, the A's never had a late inning lead of less than 3 runs.  In 1988 and
1990, they were always behind, and in 1989, the were always ahead by about 23
runs.
  
I also notice you didn't bother posting Eck's playoff record...

>  Fingers was great.  
>  1972- 1 win, 1 loss, 2 saves, 11 k's, 1.74 ERA.
>  1973- 0 wins, 1 loss, 2 saves, 8 k's, 0.66 ERA.
>  1974- 1 win, 0 losses, 2 saves, 6 k's, 1.93 ERA.

How do late inning relievers get wins?  Either by being lucky (your team comes
from behind) or by "vulturing" - losing the lead, then having your team save
your butt.

Fingers was good, no doubt about it.  But this certainly doesn't prove it.
Looks to me like 6 saves in 8 opportunities, which, at 75%, is actually below
the major league average.  And if those wins were in fact "vultures" (I do not
remember the actual circumstances), then we have only 60%.

Moral: how well you do in limited opportunity doesn't prove a whole lot.

>  6) Fingers has a 2.90 ERA compared to the 3.47 ERA of Eckersley.

Eck was also a starter.  Why not compare Eck's ERA as a closer?  I think you'll
find it blows Fingers out of the water.

How many no-hitters did Fingers pitch (one inning in relief doesn't count...)?
How many 20-win seasons did he have?

>  7) Eckersley is no longer effective.  I believe he was tagged for 11 or so
>  long balls.  Donnie Hill of the Angels got his only homer of the season
>  of the Eck.  

True, he gave up some dingers.  But he still had a very good season, in terms
of ERA and save percentage.

I doubt Fingers is very effective any more, either, BTW.

Basically, this all comes down to:

Fingers was very good for a long time.
Eck was the best reliever this planet has ever seen for a short time.  The best
100 games of Finger's career probably do not match Eck's 1989-1990 seasons.

Bill James might say, Fingers was better for career value, Eck for peak.

Marc