Should Jack Morris be in the hall-of- fame?

Question

He's the only pitcher to have the most wins in a decade not to be in hall-of-fame.(166 wins in 80s)..During his 17 yr career (the time that he started til he was done) he had more wins then anyone in baseball,2nd most ks (Nolan Ryan) 3.84 era most post season wins (9)....5 world series championships..6 time all-star....Good citizen,never had off the field problems...

Answer 1

Yes, I cheered loudly for him when he won Game 7 for my Twins in 1991, but no, he doesn't belong in the HOF.
He won 3 (not 5) WS championships, was a 5 (not 6) time all-star. The decade wins thing is an oddity, not a standard for the Hall (Mark Grace is the only decade hits or doubles leader not in, but he's not getting there, either).
Morris was a very fine pitcher for very fine teams. But his ERA was only 5% better than the league average, his "most-similar-by-age" matches him with other non-HOF pitchers...he was very good.

He's quite a distance from being HOF calibre.
Bert Blyleven should be in, not Morris.

Answer 2

Pro -

Morris also started three of those All-Star games. I think Morris has to be considered one of the top pitchers in his era and was a true gamer. Game 7 of the 1991 World Series - he was awesome.

Con -
His career numbers are obviously solid, but some are not HOF material.
He was not reporter-friendly (shouldn't matter but it does)

Overall
I think Morris has a better case than Blyeven, despite the fewer total wins and the huge Bert B. outcry. He was a legitimate ace on quality teams for more than a decade - that was enough to get Jesse Haines of the Cardinals and Red Faber of the White Sox in

So yes, I do.


I am going to edit based on some other answers - just in the spirit of friendly debate and nothing more. I was a teenager during the 80s and was a huge baseball fan. Bert Blyeven, for all his support and career numbers, was never considered one of the elite pitchers in the league. He was good, do not get me wrong, but not elite and not considerd an ace like Morris.

Morris was the ace of the 84 Tigers and 91 Twins. Blyeven was the #2 pitcher for the 87 Twins and the #2 or #3 pitcher on the 79 Pirates - he was only the ace of the very bad Indians.

Answer 3

I know there is no "magic number" for wins, but Morris's 255 wins have been eclipsed by others not in the Hall of Fame such as Tommy John and Bert Byleven. Morris was the best pitcher Detroit has had, but could not hold his career together long enough to make the Hall of Fame. He could have, and maybe should have, found a way to win 300 the way Maddux and Glavine have with careers which started after Morris's.

Answer 4

First off, I wouldn't use wins as a determiner. They're an arbitrary stat based on too many other factors. Looking at ERA during that same stretch, you can see that Morris wasn't nearly as effective as many others, ranking 51st among those with 200+ decisions:

http://www.baseball-reference.com/pi/shareit/9wFF

He's remembered for that classic Game 7 against the Twins, but his postseason numbers (3.80 ERA) aren't all that different from his regular season numbers. He simply happened to play on some very good teams.

There are more deserving pitchers still left out, notably Bert Blyleven. Morris was a very good pitcher, but he's definitely not HOF material. Not a single sub-3 ERA season? That's not the stuff of Hall of Famers in my books.

Answer 5

Morris was a real grinder, willing to tough out every start, and always a clutch performer, and consistent for a long time.

The being said, I believe the Hall of Fame should be reserved for the game's greatest, not just the good. Morris never had outstanding ERA and certainly didn't have dominant years in the style of Carlton, Stewart, Clemens, etc.

So, I vote no for Morris in the Hall of Fame, although he's more deserving than someone like Jesse Haines.

Answer 6

No. Well, he wouldn't get my vote. Very good pitcher but no truly great seasons. Someone has to be The Best Not In The Hall, and while that line currently has Santo at the head, Morris is pretty close behind.

Answer 7

Oh, heck yeah! Pitchers are all in a gray area these days. Black Jack Morris was a GREAT pitcher, but in those days NO ONE could get numbers to compare with guys already in the Hall. erik b mentioned his great game 7. The knock against some guys is that they didn't get in the post season (pooh, I say -- the post season is nice but not a judge of an individual career) and there is Morris in one of the all-time greatest World Series, doing the MOST unusual thing. Richard E says Blyleven, John, and Kaat all deserve it (he's spot on right) and I honestly think Jack compares well with all 3.

Answer 8

Yes, just for the fact he was one of the most dominant pitchers of the 1980's. He aslo won 3 World Championships with the Tigers, Twins, and Blue Jays.

Answer 9

Jack Morris was a good pitcher with a career 254 wins, WHIP 1.30 and ERA 3.90. As a comparison, Tommy John won 288 games, WHIP 1.28, and ERA 3.34 and he is not in. So based on this information what do you think his chances are?

Answer 10

He's close, but I always thought of him as good and now great. The decade stat is interesting but really doesn't mean a lot (picking a specific 10-year span is kind of arbitrary).