Jacob deGrom is still Jacob deGrom

[An Old Friend]

I wouldn't be shocked if in the next decade or two the lines between "starter" and "reliever" are almost completely blurred and we just have a team of 13 "pitchers".

I meant to address this separately.

Baseball knows they can’t let this happen. If they do, they’re signing their own death certificate.

Every story needs a hero. In baseball, the starting pitcher has long been the hero.

Can't let it happen? It's happening right in front of our eyes, and has been for 10-15 years now. Really longer than that, but once we started using "openers" that really was the beginning of the end.

I forgot where I read this but a writer looked back at random box scores from the late 80s and most of them the SPs went deep into the game and on many occasions still completed it. It was truly still a time when the SP matchup really mattered in determining the outcome of the game. They are still the most impactful player in a single game, but that impact has gone way down.

You'll still see teams use traditional starters when they have an elite talent, but more and more we'll start to see variations of "bullpen games".

They know it’s bad for the game and they’re actively trying to figure out how to correct this. Why do you think they’re trying stuff like the double hook rule?

[An Old Friend]

So… longevity and health means nothing?

I’m kind of surprised to see you arguing this guy barely played, and rarely won, and that we should ignore all of that because of his talent that we infrequently saw showcased.

Of course they do, and the hall is already filled with SPs that did that. But does dominance of the sport also mean nothing? Yes, deGrom has terrible longevity. He's around 1500 IP, might be around 1600 by the end of the year. By the end of his career if he's fortunate he might get close to 2000 IP.

A 2.51 ERA, 156 ERA+ over 1500 IP is nothing to sneeze at, that's an incredible accomplishment. If we're going to celebrate pitchers who threw a lot fewer innings than that with enshrinement, then I don't see any logical argument for why we can't do it for pitchers like deGrom.

What are we going to do in 15-20 years when there are no 200 game winners? There's already no 300 game winners and the last 250 game winners are getting close to retirement. Are we only going to enshrine closers?

A role player is the only player in MLB history to get 100% of the votes for the HOF. Not Maddux, or Griffey, or Jeter but a failed SP who found his niche in the bullpen.

I'm not saying deGrom should be in because of his talent. A 2.51 ERA is results, not talent. A 156 ERA+ is results, not talent. Being dominant for 1500 IP is results.

I can think of a lot of pitchers I'd take Chris Carpenter or Jacob deGrom over even if they miss a significant amount of time over a span of 8-10 years. Longevity and health are great, if you combine it with performance. If it's combined with mediocre or just slightly above average performance that's not as impressive to me as greatness even if it is frequently interrupted.

This would be like arguing that Joel Embiid or eventually Zion Williamson should be in the hall.

[rbirules]

I wouldn't be shocked if in the next decade or two the lines between "starter" and "reliever" are almost completely blurred and we just have a team of 13 "pitchers".

I meant to address this separately.

Baseball knows they can’t let this happen. If they do, they’re signing their own death certificate.

Every story needs a hero. In baseball, the starting pitcher has long been the hero.

Can't let it happen? It's happening right in front of our eyes, and has been for 10-15 years now. Really longer than that, but once we started using "openers" that really was the beginning of the end.

I forgot where I read this but a writer looked back at random box scores from the late 80s and most of them the SPs went deep into the game and on many occasions still completed it. It was truly still a time when the SP matchup really mattered in determining the outcome of the game. They are still the most impactful player in a single game, but that impact has gone way down.

You'll still see teams use traditional starters when they have an elite talent, but more and more we'll start to see variations of "bullpen games".

They know it’s bad for the game and they’re actively trying to figure out how to correct this. Why do you think they’re trying stuff like the double hook rule?

You can try and legislate the game to keep SPs more relevant but the fact is teams have figured out that sticking with a SP deep into a game isn't a good strategy (times through the order penalty is very real) and winning is their goal. Yes, their business is also a form of entertainment, but ultimately they want to win.

[Ozziesfan41]

I wouldn't be shocked if in the next decade or two the lines between "starter" and "reliever" are almost completely blurred and we just have a team of 13 "pitchers".

I meant to address this separately.

Baseball knows they can’t let this happen. If they do, they’re signing their own death certificate.

Every story needs a hero. In baseball, the starting pitcher has long been the hero.

Can't let it happen? It's happening right in front of our eyes, and has been for 10-15 years now. Really longer than that, but once we started using "openers" that really was the beginning of the end.

I forgot where I read this but a writer looked back at random box scores from the late 80s and most of them the SPs went deep into the game and on many occasions still completed it. It was truly still a time when the SP matchup really mattered in determining the outcome of the game. They are still the most impactful player in a single game, but that impact has gone way down.

You'll still see teams use traditional starters when they have an elite talent, but more and more we'll start to see variations of "bullpen games".

They know it’s bad for the game and they’re actively trying to figure out how to correct this. Why do you think they’re trying stuff like the double hook rule?

You can try and legislate the game to keep SPs more relevant but the fact is teams have figured out that sticking with a SP deep into a game isn't a good strategy (times through the order penalty is very real) and winning is their goal. Yes, their business is also a form of entertainment, but ultimately they want to win.

Degrom didn’t have so few innings and wins because they were pulling him after five or six innings like they are now it happened because he was on the IL so much. There are a lot of players who could have been hall of famers but injuries took them down he is one of them.

[rbirules]

So… longevity and health means nothing?

I’m kind of surprised to see you arguing this guy barely played, and rarely won, and that we should ignore all of that because of his talent that we infrequently saw showcased.

Of course they do, and the hall is already filled with SPs that did that. But does dominance of the sport also mean nothing? Yes, deGrom has terrible longevity. He's around 1500 IP, might be around 1600 by the end of the year. By the end of his career if he's fortunate he might get close to 2000 IP.

A 2.51 ERA, 156 ERA+ over 1500 IP is nothing to sneeze at, that's an incredible accomplishment. If we're going to celebrate pitchers who threw a lot fewer innings than that with enshrinement, then I don't see any logical argument for why we can't do it for pitchers like deGrom.

What are we going to do in 15-20 years when there are no 200 game winners? There's already no 300 game winners and the last 250 game winners are getting close to retirement. Are we only going to enshrine closers?

A role player is the only player in MLB history to get 100% of the votes for the HOF. Not Maddux, or Griffey, or Jeter but a failed SP who found his niche in the bullpen.

I'm not saying deGrom should be in because of his talent. A 2.51 ERA is results, not talent. A 156 ERA+ is results, not talent. Being dominant for 1500 IP is results.

I can think of a lot of pitchers I'd take Chris Carpenter or Jacob deGrom over even if they miss a significant amount of time over a span of 8-10 years. Longevity and health are great, if you combine it with performance. If it's combined with mediocre or just slightly above average performance that's not as impressive to me as greatness even if it is frequently interrupted.

This would be like arguing that Joel Embiid or eventually Zion Williamson should be in the hall.

I'm not going to pretend to follow the NBA and know of the impact of Embiid or Williamson currently. In baseball SPs in general are pitching less and less, so all their counting and accumulation stats will be less than that of previous generations. they can still stand out from the pack by being that much more dominant in their performances. No idea if Embiid or Williamson stand out from their peers as much as deGrom does when he plays. But Embiid and Williamson dont' play a position that is seeing its usage shrinking over time. (Or maybe they are. Like I said I don't follow the NBA.)

[rbirules]

I wouldn't be shocked if in the next decade or two the lines between "starter" and "reliever" are almost completely blurred and we just have a team of 13 "pitchers".

I meant to address this separately.

Baseball knows they can’t let this happen. If they do, they’re signing their own death certificate.

Every story needs a hero. In baseball, the starting pitcher has long been the hero.

Can't let it happen? It's happening right in front of our eyes, and has been for 10-15 years now. Really longer than that, but once we started using "openers" that really was the beginning of the end.

I forgot where I read this but a writer looked back at random box scores from the late 80s and most of them the SPs went deep into the game and on many occasions still completed it. It was truly still a time when the SP matchup really mattered in determining the outcome of the game. They are still the most impactful player in a single game, but that impact has gone way down.

You'll still see teams use traditional starters when they have an elite talent, but more and more we'll start to see variations of "bullpen games".

They know it’s bad for the game and they’re actively trying to figure out how to correct this. Why do you think they’re trying stuff like the double hook rule?

You can try and legislate the game to keep SPs more relevant but the fact is teams have figured out that sticking with a SP deep into a game isn't a good strategy (times through the order penalty is very real) and winning is their goal. Yes, their business is also a form of entertainment, but ultimately they want to win.

Degrom didn’t have so few innings and wins because they were pulling him after five or six innings like they are now it happened because he was on the IL so much. There are a lot of players who could have been hall of famers but injuries took them down he is one of them.

Yes in recent years, starting mid way through 2021 he has been a ticking time bomb with injuries, and really it was just the last two years. He had a perfectly normal trajectory through 2020. In 2021 mid-season he had an injury that kept him out a year, he returned late in 2022 and made 11 starts to finish the season. Couldn't stay healthy the last two years, but has made 10 starts thus far in 2025.

Chris Carpenter and even Adam Wainwright were a borderline HOF pitchers that was derailed by injuries. We'll see what deGrom can do over the next few years. If he can stay healthy for a few of them and get to 50-55 fWAR and 2000 IP while continuing his dominant ways, I could see him getting enshrined.

[Clark Kimble]

For 3 seasons in L.A., Zack Greinke was Jacob DeGrom. He went 51-15 with a 2.30 ERA despite missing several starts after Carlos Quentin charged the mound and broke Zack's collarbone after a HBP (Quentin's favorite m.o.).

[ScotchMIrish]

Hall of Famer ala the Sandy Koufax route?

43.9 WAR

228 GS
88 - 58
2.51 ERA
2.62 FiP
0.99 WHiP

ROY
2 CY's (6 top 10 finishes)
4 time all -star

I say "Yes"

88 wins gets you into the HOF? They would have to put about 1,000 other pitchers in too.

If that was the sole criteria, sure. But as is being pointed out, that's a terrible stat that should carry almost no weight. Find me pitchers with 44-50 fWAR, an ERA+ of 150 or better, and if they have less than 100 wins I'm willing to consider them for the HOF as well.

If DeGrom gets in they should disband the HOF.

[Ozziesfan41]

Hall of Famer ala the Sandy Koufax route?

43.9 WAR

228 GS
88 - 58
2.51 ERA
2.62 FiP
0.99 WHiP

ROY
2 CY's (6 top 10 finishes)
4 time all -star

I say "Yes"

88 wins gets you into the HOF? They would have to put about 1,000 other pitchers in too.

If that was the sole criteria, sure. But as is being pointed out, that's a terrible stat that should carry almost no weight. Find me pitchers with 44-50 fWAR, an ERA+ of 150 or better, and if they have less than 100 wins I'm willing to consider them for the HOF as well.

If DeGrom gets in they should disband the HOF.

+1 there are questionable players in the hall already if they let a guy in who has only pitched 100 innings in 6 of his 12 seasons and he’s a starter and not a reliever it would be an absolute joke.

[jw0595]

IMO, the difference between deGrom & Wagner or Big Lee Smith is they did their jobs. I'm on the fence about this because I wonder if he gets in, who else might? I personally think Chris Carpenter was as good as anyone when he was healthy. I'm sure there are others.

[Ozziesfan41]

IMO, the difference between deGrom & Wagner or Big Lee Smith is they did their jobs. I'm on the fence about this because I wonder if he gets in, who else might? I personally think Chris Carpenter was as good as anyone when he was healthy. I'm sure there are others.

If degrom gets in they need to let a lot of pitchers in including waino. Three or four Great full seasons should not get him into hall of fame. Waino has 200 wins to his 88 29 compete games to his 4 11 shut outs to his 2 13 seasons of 100 innings or more to his 6. And I don’t think waino will get in because injuries and covid derailed him and if he doesn’t get in degrom shouldn’t based on like 3 or 4 seasons and some partial seasons. Same goes with carp injuries derailed his hall of fame career you shouldn’t let
Players in hall of fame just because injuries derailed them

[3dender]

A lot of people on this thread don't seem to understand that if they stick with old criteria for SP HOF like wins and K total, there will literally never be another SP inducted after around 2040.

They're gonna have to rely on rate stats and hardware, whether you like it or not.

[Ozziesfan41]

A lot of people on this thread don't seem to understand that if they stick with old criteria for SP HOF like wins and K total, there will literally never be another SP inducted after around 2040.

They're gonna have to rely on rate stats and hardware, whether you like it or not.

A lot of people on this thread don’t understand that only throwing 100 innings or more in just 6 of 12 seasons is awful for any time and degrom should not get in because in the future they will have to lower the standards for starters. They should not lower the standards drastically just so degrom should get in that would be horrible and if he gets in waino needs to get in for sure since we are ignoring injuries that hindered their careers

[3dender]

A lot of people on this thread don't seem to understand that if they stick with old criteria for SP HOF like wins and K total, there will literally never be another SP inducted after around 2040.

They're gonna have to rely on rate stats and hardware, whether you like it or not.

A lot of people on this thread don’t understand that only throwing 100 innings or more in just 6 of 12 seasons is awful for any time and degrom should not get in because in the future they will have to lower the standards for starters. They should not lower the standards drastically just so degrom should get in that would be horrible and if he gets in waino needs to get in for sure since we are ignoring injuries that hindered their careers

How many pitchers who won at least 2 CYA (with two top-10 MVP finishes) and 1 other top-5 CYA finish and 3 other top 10 CYA finishes are NOT in the HOF?

[Ozziesfan41]

A lot of people on this thread don't seem to understand that if they stick with old criteria for SP HOF like wins and K total, there will literally never be another SP inducted after around 2040.

They're gonna have to rely on rate stats and hardware, whether you like it or not.

A lot of people on this thread don’t understand that only throwing 100 innings or more in just 6 of 12 seasons is awful for any time and degrom should not get in because in the future they will have to lower the standards for starters. They should not lower the standards drastically just so degrom should get in that would be horrible and if he gets in waino needs to get in for sure since we are ignoring injuries that hindered their careers

How many pitchers who won at least 2 CYA (with two top-10 MVP finishes) and 1 other top-5 CYA finish and 3 other top 10 CYA finishes are NOT in the HOF?

How many of them are starters who have only thrown 100 innings or more in just 6 of 12 seasons? If you name a couple I may reconsider my opinion. If there are I mean mark fydrich had one and a half healthy seasons was MVP 2 time all star and completed 31 of 40 starts before injuries those are bending numbers he put up. He should not be in the hall of fame because he was derailed by injuries. In the just four years degrom started 30 games he was great but the hall shouldn’t drastically lower standards to let a guy in just because of four seasons in which he was actually able to start

[3dender]

A lot of people on this thread don't seem to understand that if they stick with old criteria for SP HOF like wins and K total, there will literally never be another SP inducted after around 2040.

They're gonna have to rely on rate stats and hardware, whether you like it or not.

A lot of people on this thread don’t understand that only throwing 100 innings or more in just 6 of 12 seasons is awful for any time and degrom should not get in because in the future they will have to lower the standards for starters. They should not lower the standards drastically just so degrom should get in that would be horrible and if he gets in waino needs to get in for sure since we are ignoring injuries that hindered their careers

How many pitchers who won at least 2 CYA (with two top-10 MVP finishes) and 1 other top-5 CYA finish and 3 other top 10 CYA finishes are NOT in the HOF?

How many of them are starters who have only thrown 100 innings or more in just 6 of 12 seasons? If you name a couple I may reconsider my opinion. If there are I mean mark fydrich had one and a half healthy seasons was MVP 2 time all star and completed 31 of 40 starts before injuries those are bending numbers he put up. He should not be in the hall of fame because he was derailed by injuries. In the just four years degrom started 30 games he was great but the hall shouldn’t drastically lower standards to let a guy in just because of four seasons in which he was actually able to start

I'll take that as a "none" in response to my question.

Fidrych had one complete season, didn't win a CY (got 2nd) and finished 11 in MVP. That's not a serious comparison to deGrom.