Is Roy Oswalt a future Hall of Famer?

by Julian Levine on Feb 24, 2011 2:05 PM EST

Great question from user splashingpumpkins here. Added pic. -ed.

Getting closer.

I don't know if this idea has been tossed around, but I certainly haven't heard it much. However, after ten major-league seasons, Roy Oswalt is starting to build a Hall of Fame case. He's already racked up 44.5 bWAR and 47.6 fWAR:

This is what I find interesting though. Using the BBREF Play Index, I set some admittedly arbitrary guidelines for career numbers. More than 2000 IP. ERA+ greater than or equal to 135. And K/BB greater than or equal to 3.5...

Rk	Player	ERA+	IP	SO/BB
1	Pedro Martinez	154	2827.1	4.15
2	Cy Young	138	3312.1	3.78
3	Roy Halladay	136	2297.1	3.53
4	Roy Oswalt	136	2015.0	3.57

Provided by Baseball-Reference.com: View Play Index Tool Used
Generated 2/23/2011.

Four pitchers made the cut, one of whom was Oswalt. Now, I doubt he'll still fit these guidelines at the end of his career (just like Halladay, he only slightly meets them), but it's pretty impressive. If he can continue to pitch well, he'll have a good shot at the Hall. Which might be surprising to some. I myself am surprised at the numbers he's accumulated.

Tweet Comment 32 comments | 2 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Man

I sooo need to finish up the hall-of-fame-arc for pitchers.

See Data Differently: Beyond the Box Score | @justinbopp

by Justin Bopp on Feb 23, 2011 4:01 PM EST reply actions

Which WAR are you using for that?

B-Ref or Fangraphs?

I write a Giants blog...Splashing Pumpkins

by Julian Levine on Feb 23, 2011 4:02 PM EST up reply actions

Fangraphs for hitters, but willing to update both if I must.

I need every current HoF’er with available WAR, per career year.

See Data Differently: Beyond the Box Score | @justinbopp

by Justin Bopp on Feb 23, 2011 4:06 PM EST up reply actions

I wish there was a better system for evaluating pitchers

Both B-Ref WAR and fWAR have inherent flaws. And it will be hard to make a HOF WAR arc for pitchers, right? As the game’s changed so much…Decades ago, pitchers racked up innings, but didn’t strike out batters at the same high clips. That’s why there is no fWAR for Cy Young, for example.

I write a Giants blog...Splashing Pumpkins

by Julian Levine on Feb 23, 2011 4:13 PM EST up reply actions

Is there such thing as a flawless system for pitcher value?

I mean, it’s a really hard question to define, right? What’s the best we could do?

@Sky_Kalkman

by Sky Kalkman on Feb 24, 2011 2:11 PM EST up reply actions

Best we could do...

is look at everything. That’s what I do…bWAR, fWAR, K rates, BB rates, GB rates, ERA+, FIP discrepancies. Hard to come up with one simple accurate number representing their value though.

I write a Giants blog...Splashing Pumpkins

by Julian Levine on Feb 24, 2011 2:35 PM EST up reply actions

Why is tRA not used in any calculations framework?

Genuinely curious – I always liked using tRA for pitchers.

Rays/Cubs - AnotherCubsBlog.net - @Manu_P_Mishra on Twitter

by Mish on Feb 24, 2011 4:22 PM EST up reply actions

Puts Oswalt in the top third of HOF pitchers with 1500IP through their first 10 seasons.

Not too shabby.

Data, for registered Sports Reference users: http://www.baseball-reference.com/play-index/share.cgi?id=FXxll

Blogger and Editor, Rational Pastime Blog. Twitter: @RationalPastime.

by J-Doug on Feb 23, 2011 7:55 PM EST reply actions

Wow.

Unbelievable…you hear names like Halladay and Sabathia thrown around as future HOF, but Oswalt is building a pretty impressive case himself. I wonder what it’ll take for him to get the nod….8 more seasons at 2.5 WAR/season should do the trick, no?

I write a Giants blog...Splashing Pumpkins

by Julian Levine on Feb 23, 2011 8:02 PM EST up reply actions

He'd be in the conversation for sure

I think he needs to get to 70 to be a lock, and how many years does he have left in him?

Blogger and Editor, Rational Pastime Blog. Twitter: @RationalPastime.

by J-Doug on Feb 23, 2011 8:09 PM EST up reply actions

That's a tough question.

Given his size, isn’t it harder for him to maintain a long career? Using comparables, Maddux and Stieb were the same height, if that means anything, ha. Maddux pitched till 42, Stieb pitched till 35. I’m inclined to think Oswalt only has five years or so left in him. It would be impressive if he can pitch beyond that.

I write a Giants blog...Splashing Pumpkins

by Julian Levine on Feb 23, 2011 8:24 PM EST up reply actions

I think there were some retirement rumors.

That said he was at least considering retiring after 2010. If those rumors are already going around, who knows how long he’ll go.

by ThePanda on Feb 24, 2011 12:10 AM EST up reply actions

Wow. That puts this in perspective.

Now I’d say it’s a stretch he goes five more years, let alone eight. I think he has a good five more years in him, but it’s a matter of whether he wants to play more. Will five more years give him a reasonable HOF case…or to rephrase, how good would he have to be in five more years to have a legitimate, or even borderline HOF case?

I write a Giants blog...Splashing Pumpkins

by Julian Levine on Feb 24, 2011 12:50 AM EST up reply actions

Yeah, I think 65 is about the tipping point for me, although peak matters.

I think Oswalt needs four more seasons at his career average of 4.5 rWAR. That many WAR split over eight seasons would just kill his rate stats too much.

@Sky_Kalkman

by Sky Kalkman on Feb 24, 2011 2:12 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs

No doubt. But does he make it four or five more seasons?

I doubt it.

See Data Differently: Beyond the Box Score | @justinbopp

by Justin Bopp on Feb 24, 2011 2:17 PM EST up reply actions

To me he's a long shot

If he pitches six or seven more years and averages 3+ rWAR/year I think he should at least be in the conversation. The strike against him is that he never had that eyepopping season. He never won a Cy Young or came particularly close. He doesn’t have an iconic post-season moment that people remember, and he probably won’t get 300 wins. So he will in all likelihood have a difficult case.

He is going to have to make it on the back of his regular season numbers. Given that, there is no way he makes it with less than 200 wins. If he fails to reach 200 wins he will enter the David Cone one-and-done territory.

If he gets to 200 wins he will be in the conversation, but even if he gets to the 220 or so win-range I can’t imagine that people would vote for him over a Mike Mussina or a Curt Schilling. There is a chance that at least one (and maybe both) of them will still be on the ballot when Oswalt makes his debut. In addition to the pitchers there will also most likely be a backlog of steroid-era hitters that the voters seem to have no clue of what to do with.

It’s not impossible for Oswalt to make it but he would probably have to pitch at a 3+ WAR level for the next 8-10 years in order for him to be an odds-on favorite to make it. At that point he would clearly be better than the David Cone’s and and the Kevin Brown’s of the world that have been rejected in recent years. Although, even then the backlog of players from the steroid-era will make it even more difficult for Oswalt than if he was on the ballot next year.

by Indian Bob on Feb 24, 2011 8:12 AM EST reply actions

I've been working on a lil' system...

… and my first reaction was, of course he’s going to be a HOFer! I’ve always thought he and Tim Hudson were on the path. Always saw them as quite similar, valuewise. Still do, really.

Both still have some work to get there, but I’d have a couple more 5-win seasons from each putting them over the top. In the system I’ve got, the bottom rung HOF-caliber isn’t Catfish Hunter and Rube Marquard, though. It’s Orel Hershiser, Tommy John, Early Wynn, etc. Actual deserving pitchers.

I’m pretty sure they’ll both get there. As for the real HOF? Who knows. Neither approaches Kevin Brown and may not reach Mussina/Schilling status. Brown was one and done Moose and Schilling will likely struggle. So, what the hell do I know?

Hence working on a new system…

On Twitter: @baseballtwit

by adarowski on Feb 24, 2011 3:00 PM EST reply actions

Adam,

What cut-off do you use for pitchers? I’d think around 80?

by Indian Bob on Feb 24, 2011 3:08 PM EST up reply actions

To have a cutoff of 80 would result in 45 or so Hall of Fame pitchers.

There are other factors involved, but Hershiser is 70.5 and I see him as sitting on the borderline.

On Twitter: @baseballtwit

by adarowski on Feb 24, 2011 3:17 PM EST up reply actions

Okay, thanks. I guess that makes sense.

I understand that wWAR isn’t the be-all-end-all and that we should look at the body of work.

There is the idea that we need to be careful of not diluting the Hall of Fame (I’m not sure I agree with it but the idea is certainly wide-spread). The logical way to do that is to set a median threshold and not allow entry to anyone below this median-threshold (iirc the JAWS-system is based on this premise). Correct me if I’m wrong but I think that today the median sits around 89 wWAR for pitchers. This means that you are saying that consideration should start at roughly 80% of the median. That makes a certain amount of sense to me. It is also more lenient than the standard the voters seem to be applying now (cf. the recent rejections of Cone and Brown).

by Indian Bob on Feb 24, 2011 3:54 PM EST up reply actions

Moose and Curt will both do a lot better I think

Because they both put up great performances on the national stage in October. Kevin Brown just never played in the right places or peaked at the right moments. It’s a shame, really.

Blogger and Editor, Rational Pastime Blog. Twitter: @RationalPastime.

by J-Doug on Feb 24, 2011 3:57 PM EST up reply actions

How much do you think the Mitchell Report had to do with it?

Nobody really talked about it, but he was on it.

On Twitter: @baseballtwit

by adarowski on Feb 24, 2011 4:14 PM EST up reply actions

That too.

Blogger and Editor, Rational Pastime Blog. Twitter: @RationalPastime.

by J-Doug on Feb 24, 2011 4:58 PM EST up reply actions

Soooo....

About Cy Young. Isn’t his Innings Pitched total WAY higher than that? I’m confused why it appears so low there..

In fact, his total innings pitched via BRef: 7356.0 (BTW, holy shit.)

So, er, what happened up top there? (Excellent post, BTW, just confused about Cyrus!)

by Patrick42 on Feb 24, 2011 4:56 PM EST reply actions

Not entirely sure

Maybe it only counted his post-1900 innings? I think as a pre-set, the play index tool has post-1900, but I’m not 100% sure.

I write a Giants blog...Splashing Pumpkins

by Julian Levine on Feb 24, 2011 9:11 PM EST up reply actions

I think it’s interesting how we regard WAR as a poor barometer of performance from year to year, but it becomes a monolithic obstacle when it comes to pitchers approaching the Hall of Fame. Now I understand that this has to do with milestones and the people voting as much as anything, but I find this argument much more interesting when weighed against Andy Petitte. Oswalt has a much better ERA and rate stats, but Pettite has 50 more wins (though we don’t know how many Oswalt will have when he retires).

At the moment I’d actually lump him with Pettite: great career, but not really a Hall of Famer yet. If his 2010 bounceback helps his career hold out for another five years, I’ll reconsider.

Et tu, Ribe?

by Solidarity on Feb 24, 2011 5:43 PM EST reply actions

Two thoughts.

1) We regard WAR as a poor barometer, year to year? What do you mean “we”? I don’t. It isn’t perfect, but it is a very year to year barometer, especially Fangraphs WAR. B-Ref WAR for pitchers is screwy year to year because of the way it handles issues like BABIP.

2) Even if it is a poor year to year barometer, which B-Ref WAR is, in my opinion, if we assume that it is inaccurate, ie, poor, randomly, then over a career the up and down should cancel out. Giving us an excellent view of overall value. This applies particularly strongly to B-Ref WAR, because given a large enough sample, that somewhat weird method of evaluating pitchers can find BABIP control skills, (Which, as we know, are fairly small, but over the course of a career can definitely matter.)

by Patrick42 on Feb 26, 2011 10:43 AM EST up reply actions

This can be mostly negated by the fact that I actually meant wins, but typed WAR.

So, a well-reasoned argument on your part, but I was saying the wrong thing. My apologies.

Et tu, Ribe?

by Solidarity on Feb 26, 2011 10:24 PM EST up reply actions

Oswalt = Hall of Very Good

Only 3 seasons with WAR (Baseball-reference.com) over 5. The search you did in the OP is interesting company, but Oswalt only had 200 Ks in 2 seasons. Barring a miracle, he won’t get to 300 wins, and even 200 may be out of reach. I don’t get the sense he’ll be around too much longer. Without a Cy or more ink, I just don’t see it.

He’s an elite pitcher and a very good one. Just not HOF good.

I am not a witch.

by RememberthePhitans on Feb 24, 2011 9:46 PM EST reply actions

I agree completely.

Oswald has never dominated his league in the manner I’d expect of a hall of famer. And so, unless he maintains remarkable longevity… No.

by Patrick42 on Feb 26, 2011 10:35 AM EST up reply actions

Rate-wise (ERA+), he's similar to Bert Blyleven (before Bert's decline)

However, Oswalt’s career high in BFP is 1002, while Blyleven beat that 12 times. He had nine seasons with at least 1100 BFP, three with at least 1200 BFP, and one with 1321. Damn.

@Sky_Kalkman

by Sky Kalkman on Feb 27, 2011 10:31 AM EST reply actions