Jeff Bagwell


I can feel my quads shaking just imagining trying to hold this batting stance while some slow poke like Josh Beckett is on the mound.

From 1994-2000 there was no better first baseman in the National League than Jeff Bagwell.  It took the arrival of Albert Pujols to change that moreso than any sharp decline from Bagwell.  He had another four good years after Pujols came on the scene.  Bagwell played fifteen seasons – all with the Houston Astros and in four of them he played every game.  He hit all of the meaningful awards:  Rookie of the Year in 1991, Most Valuable Player in 1994, All-Star four times (surprisingly low number in my opinion), Silver Slugger Award three times and Gold Glove Award in 1994.  He could hit for high average (.297 career), power (449 HR) and for a first baseman he was an asset on the base paths (202 SB).

Although he had won Rookie of the Year three years earlier, 1994 was the year he truly burst on the scene as the premier first baseman in the League.  His season was incredible: a .368 average with 39 homers; 116 RBI leading the league; 104 runs tying for the league lead; 15 steals and a league leading .750 slugging percentage.  He dipped in 1995, but was back on top in 1996 to reel off six straight seasons with over 100 RBI.  In 1999 he finished second in the MVP voting with a .302, 42 HR, 106 RBI and 30 steal campaign.  Then, in 2000 he was even better with a .310, 47 HR, 102 RBI season.  He must have gotten off to a horrible start that season, because it wasn’t even good enough to get him to the All-Star game and he slid to 7th in the MVP vote.  The baseball writers must have killed him for his falloff from 30 to 9 steals!

Throughout his career Bagwell was a constant in the Houston lineup and consummate run producer.  His 162 game average over 15 seasons was to drive in 115 runs and score another 114 himself.  There just isn’t much to criticize with his game.  He often walked more than striking out, was solid with the glove and the offensive numbers speak for themselves.  There are some contemporaries with more homers and RBIs than Bagwell, but it took most of them another five seasons of mediocrity to accumulate those totals.  It only takes ten seasons to be eligible for the Hall of Fame, so one could argue that a player’s ten best seasons are what should be considered.  I’m not going that far, but to me Jeff Bagwell was the best at his position and close to the top for long enough that he deserves enshrinement in baseball’s Hall of Fame.

Last year was Bagwell’s second on the ballot and he appeared on 56% of the ballots.  Only Jack Morris returns with more support next year.  Some of what may be hurting Bagwell is that  the era of performance-enhancing drugs has skewed the context of power numbers.  In seasons where he reached the mid-40’s in homers, guys like McGwire, Sosa and later Bonds were passing 60.  I won’t make the argument that Bagwell deserves to be in because he accomplished his feats without P.E.D.’s  There is really no way to know that.  I’ve arrived at a certain philosophy when considering players from the P.E.D. era for Cooperstown that I won’t go into here.  What I do know is that regardless of who was doing what, Bagwell was the best at his position for a long time and if you do that you’re a Hall of Famer.

The stats below are from www.baseball-reference.com, a great resource for researching baseball history through the numbers.  Baseball Reference gives four Hall of Fame metrics – at least a couple of which are derived from Bill James – on a player’s page.  Bagwell measures up as Hall of Fame worthy on three of them.  He falls just short on the metric that considers the number of times leading the league in certain stats.

CAREER

Year Tm Lg G PA AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI SB CS BB SO BA OBP SLG Awards
1991 HOU NL 156 650 554 79 163 26 4 15 82 7 4 75 116 .294 .387 .437 RoY-1
1992 HOU NL 162 697 586 87 160 34 6 18 96 10 6 84 97 .273 .368 .444 MVP-19
1993 HOU NL 142 609 535 76 171 37 4 20 88 13 4 62 73 .320 .388 .516 MVP-20
1994 HOU NL 110 479 400 104 147 32 2 39 116 15 4 65 65 .368 .451 .750 AS,MVP-1,GG,SS
1995 HOU NL 114 539 448 88 130 29 0 21 87 12 5 79 102 .290 .399 .496 MVP-15
1996 HOU NL 162 719 568 111 179 48 2 31 120 21 7 135 114 .315 .451 .570 AS,MVP-9
1997 HOU NL 162 717 566 109 162 40 2 43 135 31 10 127 122 .286 .425 .592 AS,MVP-3,SS
1998 HOU NL 147 661 540 124 164 33 1 34 111 19 7 109 90 .304 .424 .557  
1999 HOU NL 162 729 562 143 171 35 0 42 126 30 11 149 127 .304 .454 .591 AS,MVP-2,SS
2000 HOU NL 159 719 590 152 183 37 1 47 132 9 6 107 116 .310 .424 .615 MVP-7
2001 HOU NL 161 717 600 126 173 43 4 39 130 11 3 106 135 .288 .397 .568 MVP-7
2002 HOU NL 158 691 571 94 166 33 2 31 98 7 3 101 130 .291 .401 .518  
2003 HOU NL 160 702 605 109 168 28 2 39 100 11 4 88 119 .278 .373 .524 MVP-14
2004 HOU NL 156 679 572 104 152 29 2 27 89 6 4 96 131 .266 .377 .465  
2005 HOU NL 39 123 100 11 25 4 0 3 19 0 0 18 21 .250 .358 .380  
15 Yrs 2150 9431 7797 1517 2314 488 32 449 1529 202 78 1401 1558 .297 .408 .540  
162 Game Avg. 162 711 587 114 174 37 2 34 115 15 6 106 117 .297 .408 .540  
Provided by Baseball-Reference.com: View Original Table
Generated 5/20/2012.
 
POST SEASON:
Year Tm Lg Series Opp Rslt G PA AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI SB CS BB SO BA
1997 HOU NL NLDS ATL L 3 13 12 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5 .083
1998 HOU NL NLDS SDP L 4 16 14 0 2 0 0 0 4 0 0 1 6 .143
1999 HOU NL NLDS ATL L 4 19 13 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 4 .154
                                       
2001 HOU NL NLDS ATL L 3 12 7 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 1 5 1 .429
                                       
2004 HOU NL NLDS ATL W 5 25 22 5 7 2 0 2 5 0 0 3 3 .318
2004 HOU NL NLCS STL L 7 31 27 1 7 2 0 0 3 1 1 4 5 .259
2005 HOU NL NLDS ATL W 2 2 2 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 .500
2005 HOU NL NLCS STL W 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .000
2005 HOU NL WS CHW L 4 10 8 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 .125
6 Yrs (9 Series) 33 129 106 11 24 4 0 2 13 1 2 19 25 .226
6 NLDS 21 87 70 9 16 2 0 2 10 0 1 15 19 .229
2 NLCS 8 32 28 1 7 2 0 0 3 1 1 4 5 .250
1 WS 4 10 8 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 .125
Provided by Baseball-Reference.com: View Original Table
Generated 5/20/2012.

The steroid era and Cooperstown


I wish there were a way that we could know exactly who used performance enhancing drugs and who didn’t.  If we could make that determination beyond the shadow of a doubt, I would say that none of the players who cheated should get in.  I hate what they have done to baseball’s records and I hate what they did to the flow of the game during the height of that era.  However, since we can’t really know who did and who didn’t, when it comes to the Hall of Fame I hold my nose and ignore the P.E.D. factor.  With disgust, I will look at Barry Bonds‘, Mark McGwire and Roger Clemens‘ careers as if they achieved greatness on an even playing field with everyone else.

Part of the problem is that for several years all of those players I just mentioned weren’t cheating.  Major League Baseball didn’t ban steroids until 1991 and didn’t start testing for it until ten years later.  Therefore, we don’t know that everyone wasn’t using them.  You can’t tell just by looking at a player.  The first guy nailed for it was a 180 pound slap-hitting outfielder named Alex Sanchez.Ignoring the scepter and rumors of steroids surrounding players gets me out of the, “he would have made it anyway,” argument also.  Sure, Barry Bonds was off to a great start before he turned into the Hulk, but (a) we don’t know that he wasn’t already using when he was skinnier and (b) we don’t know how much shorter his peak production would have been without allegedly shooting up.  I’m not going there with anyone.

While we can’t say with certainty who was or wasn’t using P.E.D.’s we know it was happening and we know that it impacted offensive numbers positively and pitching numbers negatively.  That is why it is so important to measure players against their contemporaries when thinking about Hall of Fame worthiness.  A great hitter from the 1960’s won’t have numbers as impressive than an equally great one from the 1990’s for several reasons – P.E.D.’s among them.  Likewise, a great pitcher from the 1990’s will have a much higher ERA than an equally great one from the 1960’s.  That isn’t only due to P.E.D.’s, but it’s a major factor.  What is important isn’t where a player ranks on all-time leader boards, but how he finished in MVP voting, how many All-Star teams he was on and how often he led his league in important statistics.

My philosophy on the P.E.D. era causes me to consider some players for Cooperstown that I would rather shun and causes me to leave out some players that were probably clean and could have been Hall of Famers if the whole game wasn’t skewed during their careers.  Fred McGriff is a case in point and there are plenty of others.  Unfortunately, we have no way of separating the good apples from the bad.  The way I look at it is:   if you’re arguably the best at your position during your era you deserve to be in Cooperstown regardless of what you had to do to achieve that level of greatness.  I hate that, but it’s the corner I feel pushed into.

I hold my nose and pretend that guys like Bonds, McGwire and Sosa succeeded on an even playing field with everyone else of their era.

Jack Morris


Jack Morris was a consistently good starting pitcher for a long time and was outstanding in the 1991 World Series. Is that enough to send him to Cooperstown?

For me, the really interesting thing about writing this blog so far has been putting my assumptions to the test while I research a player’s resume. I supported Lee Smith for the Hall of Fame for years, but while writing my first post I became convinced otherwise. As for Jack Morris, I’ve never thought of him as a Hall of Famer. I was shocked to see that he is the leading vote-getter among returning eligible players. He was on 66.7% of the ballots last year and needs only 75% to make it. So, surely I’m missing something if so many voters disagree with me. Now that I’ve looked into it further I am even more convinced that he is not a Hall of Famer.

Morris was a very good starting pitcher and a model of consistency for a long time. He won 254 games in his 18 years in the majors and he was a workhorse, completing 175 games. However, he gave up nearly four runs a game with his 3.90 career ERA..  His most memorable moment – and I suspect the reason he is in this conversation – was his 1991 World Series performance. In particular, his Game 7 10-inning complete game shutout that clinched it. He made three starts in that series, winning two of them along with the series Most Valuable Player Award. His career post-season numbers are impressive. He went 7-4 with a 3.80 record in 13 post-season starts. In the World Series alone he was 4-2 with a 2.96 ERA in 7 starts. Post-season heroics is – and should be – part of the debate, but unless you’re ready to put Scott Brosius and Livan Hernandez in the Hall, let’s take a step back. Not that they were bad players, but the Hall isn’t for guys that were just not bad.


In Morris’s defense, he pitched in some hitters’ parks in Detroit and Minnesota. He pitched his entire career in the AL facing the DH three to five times a night while NL hurlers have the luxury of facing their light hitting counterpart every time through the order. Scoring was up in his era with the onset of the steroid era, but even then, 3.90 is not what you want out of your ace. I’m done making excuses for his career numbers.

Since stats can be misleading when comparing players of different eras, I always look at how a player compares to those who played at the same time. If everyone else was giving up five runs a game, a guy that gives up four may be fantastic.  So, how did Jack Morris measure up to other starting pitchers of his era?  H led the American League in wins twice.  He had 14 in the strike shortened 1981 season and 21 in 1992. He led the league in innings in 1983 en route to a 20-13 record with a 3.34 ERA. He led in strike outs once. Five All-Star games is pretty good. Other than, the high ERA, the fact that he never finished higher than third in the Cy Young voting is the biggest mark against him. To me, it’s hard to put a pitcher in the Hall of Fame who is never – not one year – considered the best in his league and Morris was never even considered the second best according to the Cy Young ballots.  He was in the top ten six times, so he was often good, but rarely was he great.  He should have shut it down two years earlier than he did.  Those last two seasons he was a combined 17-18 with ERAs ballooning to 6.19 and 5.60.  Here’s some surprising trivia.  There is one active pitcher with more career wins that Jack Morris.  Can you name him?  It’s no one I would have ever guessed.

I had to look up Don Sutton and Bert Blyleven to compare them to Morris.  They are the two Hall of Famers that come to mind when I think of him.  Both had long, solid careers with some good seasons.  I thought that they might have set a precedent that Morris would ride into Cooperstown, but Sutton won about 70 more games and an ERA half a run lower.  Blyleven also won more games and gave up a half a run less per game than Morris.  Those guys might not have had the signature World Series moment that Morris did, but they were also good post-season pitchers.  Therefore, I can’t even give Morris the benefit of precedence.  He does not belong in Cooperstown.  However, he is the leader in the clubhouse and unless Jeff Bagwell or some of the first-year eligibles like Mike Piazza, Craig Biggio, Sammy Sosa, Roger Clemens or Barry Bonds jump the line this may be his year.

The stats below are from www.baseball-reference.comThey provide four quantitative measures of a player’s Hall of Fame credentials.  Morris deserves to be in the Hall according to two of them.

Year Tm Lg W L ERA G GS CG SHO IP H BB SO Awards
1977 DET AL 1 1 3.74 7 6 1 0 45.2 38 23 28
1978 DET AL 3 5 4.33 28 7 0 0 106.0 107 49 48
1979 DET AL 17 7 3.28 27 27 9 1 197.2 179 59 113
1980 DET AL 16 15 4.18 36 36 11 2 250.0 252 87 112
1981 DET AL 14 7 3.05 25 25 15 1 198.0 153 78 97 AS,CYA-3,MVP-15
1982 DET AL 17 16 4.06 37 37 17 3 266.1 247 96 135
1983 DET AL 20 13 3.34 37 37 20 1 293.2 257 83 232 CYA-3,MVP-21
1984 DET AL 19 11 3.60 35 35 9 1 240.1 221 87 148 AS,CYA-7
1985 DET AL 16 11 3.33 35 35 13 4 257.0 212 110 191 AS
1986 DET AL 21 8 3.27 35 35 15 6 267.0 229 82 223 CYA-5
1987 DET AL 18 11 3.38 34 34 13 0 266.0 227 93 208 AS,CYA-9,MVP-20
1988 DET AL 15 13 3.94 34 34 10 2 235.0 225 83 168
1989 DET AL 6 14 4.86 24 24 10 0 170.1 189 59 115
1990 DET AL 15 18 4.51 36 36 11 3 249.2 231 97 162
1991 MIN AL 18 12 3.43 35 35 10 2 246.2 226 92 163 AS,CYA-4,MVP-13
1992 TOR AL 21 6 4.04 34 34 6 1 240.2 222 80 132 CYA-5,MVP-13
1993 TOR AL 7 12 6.19 27 27 4 1 152.2 189 65 103
1994 CLE AL 10 6 5.60 23 23 1 0 141.1 163 67 100
18 Yrs 254 186 3.90 549 527 175 28 3824.0 3567 1390 2478
162 Game Avg. 16 12 3.90 35 33 11 2 242 225 88 157
W L ERA G GS CG SHO IP H BB SO Awards
DET (14 yrs) 198 150 3.73 430 408 154 24 3042.2 2767 1086 1980
TOR (2 yrs) 28 18 4.87 61 61 10 2 393.1 411 145 235
MIN (1 yr) 18 12 3.43 35 35 10 2 246.2 226 92 163
CLE (1 yr) 10 6 5.60 23 23 1 0 141.1 163 67 100
Provided by Baseball-Reference.com: View Original Table
Generated 5/9/2012.

Lee Smith


Lee Smith

Lee Smith is one of the first players I can remember watching.  During summer vacations with just about all day to do what I wanted I usually spent a lot of the afternoon watching Cubs games on WGN.  They were the only team I could see other than the Saturday game of the week on NBC.

Little did I know then, that he was in the process of defining a new role in major league baseball that would continue to this day nearly thirty years later.  He wasn’t the first – Rollie Fingers, Rich Gossage and Bruce Sutter morphed into closer roles during their careers, but Smith and those who came after him turned it into a one-inning specialist role that would become a staple on every roster.

Next year will be his eleventh on the Hall of Fame ballot and a player must be selected on 75% of the ballots cast by HoF voters to get in.  He appeared on about 50% of the ballots last year.  I wavered in my opinion about whether he should be enshrined in Cooperstown or not.

Why he should be in:  Smith led his league in saves three times and tied for the lead once more on his way to compiling a then-record 478 career saves  and a 3.03 career ERA before retiring in 199 after the 1997 season.  During his first 8 years he often pitched more than one inning per outing as the closer role was not as specialized early in his career.  He’s one of the guys that turned it into what it is today –  for better or worse.  Smith was a seven-time All-Star and his most impressive credential, in my opinion, is finishing in the top-five three times for Cy Young Award consideration, including a second place finish in 1991 when he went 6-3 with 47 saves and a 2.34 ERA for the Cardinals.  He fit the role of an intimidating closer.  Big, hard-throwing, scowling and able to get the strikeout.  He’s 15th on the all-time list for strikeouts per nine-innings.

It’s tough to compare Smith to relief pitchers who are in the Hall, because the roles just weren’t the same.  Since Dennis Eckersley was a starter for much of his career, I won’t even attempt to compare him to Smith.  The Hall of Fame relievers that started their careers earlier than Smith, like Rollie Fingers, Rich Gossage and Bruce Sutter were called upon to pitch earlier in games so they have a few more wins and Smith has a lot more saves.  Players that came along after Smith were put into a closer role that rarely required pitching more than an inning.  This is one reason it’s tricky to compare statistics of players from different eras.  Since Smith straddles the pre-closer and closer eras it’s even murkier. 

A more important barometer for Hall of Fame consideration is to look at how a player stacked up against his contemporaries.  That is best seen in All-Star selections, awards and leading the league in important statistics.  For the sake of comparison, when it comes to All-Star appearances, top-five finishes for the Cy Young Award and leading their leagues in saves, Smith is very close to Gossage, who is in the Hall of Fame.  As I mentioned earlier, seven All-Star selections and three top-five finishes in Cy Young voting tell you that he was considered one of the best at his position for several years.

What’s keeping him out:  First, let’s look at the Gossage, Fingers and Sutter comparisons.  The fact that they were called upon for more than just an inning lends some credence to the argument that they were more valuable to their teams.  Back then, the most clutch relief pitcher was more of a “fireman” coming in to save the game when the other team has a rally going, threatening to tie or take the lead.  It didn’t matter what inning it was and that’s why the term “save” was established.  During Smith’s career it developed into the one inning role we know it as today.  As long as you can get three outs without blowing a three run lead, you get credited for “saving” the game.  A pitcher could theoretically have an 18.00 ERA and be perfect.  So, in the comparison to those pioneer closers who are Hall of Famers, Smith comes up short, because while his role was similar early in his career it was much different in the latter half.

The losses are the biggest argument against Smith.  He went 71-92 and had two seasons with ten losses during his career.  He’s 4th on the all-time blown save list.  Yes, two of the pitchers with more blown saves are in the Hall of Fame, but they blew a lot of those saves trying to finish out two or three innings rather than just one.  I suspect that if a closer lost ten games in today’s game he would wind up in middle relief. 

Sure, he recorded 478 saves, but it took 18 seasons to do it.  Bruce Sutter didn’t save nearly as many games (300), but only pitched 12 seasons.  Sutter averaged the same number of saves per season; was an All-Star six times; won a Cy Young Award and led the league in saves five times.  Ironically, Smith became the Cubs closer after Sutter left the north side for the rival, St. Louis Cardinals and then later Smith too would leave the Cubs for the red birds.

There’s no reason to think that if Gossage, Sutter, Fingers or Dan Quisenberry had begun their careers at the same time as Smith and pitched as long, they would not have had more saves.

While Gossage, Fingers and – to a lesser degree, Sutter –  cemented their clutch performer credentials saving games in the post-season Lee Smith has no such experience to put him over the top.  In fact, his four post-season appearances are a mark against him.  He lost two of those games and had an ERA over 8.00.

So, is he Cooperstown Bound?  Before I started writing this post I would have said, “yes,” and I’ve argued that he should be in for years, but not anymore.  Compared to the Hall of Fame relief pitchers that preceded him and the future Hall of Fame closers that will come after him, I don’t think Lee Smith was as dominant as he needs to be.  A Hall of Fame closer is the kind of pitcher that is so formidable that he changes the way the opponent manages the game: turning it into an eight inning game where the other team pulls out all the stops and goes for broke if they have a chance to tie the game before the closer gets in.  I just don’t think Smith was that guy.  I don’t think fans of opposing teams lost hope and headed for the exits when he came in to protect a lead.  He piled up saves, but his record has already been broken by two players and one of them, Mariano Rivera has added another 130 saves to that record.

Lee Smith was a great relief pitcher, and a good, consistent closer, but I have come to agree with the 50% of Hall of Fame voters who have left him off their ballots for over a decade now.  He was not outstanding enough to earn a spot in the Hall of Fame.  He may have followed Bruce Sutter from the Cubs to the Cardinals, but he should not be following him to Cooperstown.

It will be interesting to see if he finally makes it next year.  A player must appear on 75% of the ballots cast to get in.  Of eligible players, only Jack Morris and Jeff Bagwell appeared on more ballots last year.  Unfortunately for Smith, there are a wave of first-year eligible players that may jump the line in front of him.  Were it not for the question of performance enhancing drugs, a few of them would be first ballot Hall of Famers.

Stats below are from www.baseball-reference.com. It’s a great resource for researching baseball history.  They have created some interesting metrics that they use to gauge a player’s worthiness of the Hall of Fame such as the “Hall of Fame monitor” and “Hall of Fame standards.”  For the record, Smith makes it based on the former, but not the latter.

Year Tm Lg W L ERA SV IP H HR BB SO WHIP Awards
1980 CHC NL 2 0 2.91 0 21.2 21 0 14 17 1.615  
1981 CHC NL 3 6 3.51 1 66.2 57 2 31 50 1.320  
1982 CHC NL 2 5 2.69 17 117.0 105 5 37 99 1.214  
1983 CHC NL 4 10 1.65 29 103.1 70 5 41 91 1.074 AS,CYA-9,MVP-18
1984 CHC NL 9 7 3.65 33 101.0 98 6 35 86 1.317  
1985 CHC NL 7 4 3.04 33 97.2 87 9 32 112 1.218  
1986 CHC NL 9 9 3.09 31 90.1 69 7 42 93 1.229  
1987 CHC NL 4 10 3.12 36 83.2 84 4 32 96 1.386 AS
1988 BOS AL 4 5 2.80 29 83.2 72 7 37 96 1.303 MVP-21
1989 BOS AL 6 1 3.57 25 70.2 53 6 33 96 1.217  
1990 TOT MLB 5 5 2.06 31 83.0 71 3 29 87 1.205  
1990 BOS AL 2 1 1.88 4 14.1 13 0 9 17 1.535  
1990 STL NL 3 4 2.10 27 68.2 58 3 20 70 1.136  
1991 STL NL 6 3 2.34 47 73.0 70 5 13 67 1.137 AS,CYA-2,MVP-8
1992 STL NL 4 9 3.12 43 75.0 62 4 26 60 1.173 AS,CYA-4
1993 TOT MLB 2 4 3.88 46 58.0 53 11 14 60 1.155 AS
1993 STL NL 2 4 4.50 43 50.0 49 11 9 49 1.160  
1993 NYY AL 0 0 0.00 3 8.0 4 0 5 11 1.125  
1994 BAL AL 1 4 3.29 33 38.1 34 6 11 42 1.174 AS,CYA-5,MVP-14
1995 CAL AL 0 5 3.47 37 49.1 42 3 25 43 1.358 AS
1996 TOT MLB 3 4 3.74 2 55.1 57 4 26 41 1.500  
1996 CAL AL 0 0 2.45 0 11.0 8 0 3 6 1.000  
1996 CIN NL 3 4 4.06 2 44.1 49 4 23 35 1.624  
1997 MON NL 0 1 5.82 5 21.2 28 2 8 15 1.662  
18 Yrs 71 92 3.03 478 1289.1 1133 89 486 1251 1.256  
162 Game Avg. 5 6 3.03 32 85 75 6 32 83 1.256  
  W L ERA SV IP H HR BB SO WHIP Awards
CHC (8 yrs) 40 51 2.92 180 681.1 591 38 264 644 1.255  
STL (4 yrs) 15 20 2.90 160 266.2 239 23 68 246 1.151  
BOS (3 yrs) 12 7 3.04 58 168.2 138 13 79 209 1.287  
CAL (2 yrs) 0 5 3.28 37 60.1 50 3 28 49 1.293  
MON (1 yr) 0 1 5.82 5 21.2 28 2 8 15 1.662  
CIN (1 yr) 3 4 4.06 2 44.1 49 4 23 35 1.624  
NYY (1 yr) 0 0 0.00 3 8.0 4 0 5 11 1.125  
BAL (1 yr) 1 4 3.29 33 38.1 34 6 11 42 1.174  
                       
NL (14 yrs) 58 76 3.03 347 1014.0 907 67 363 940 1.252  
AL (7 yrs) 13 16 3.04 131 275.1 226 22 123 311 1.268  
Provided by Baseball-Reference.com: View Original Table
Generated 5/6/2012.