What's Good For the Goose...?
By Landon Evanson
Alright, I need this explained to me. Bruce Sutter has a plaque in the Hall of Fame but Goose Gossage does not? Am I hearing that right? Is that really possible?
Look, the Baseball Hall of Fame has become a fraternity of elitists with no end in sight. Granted, it should not be electing five and six players each year but at the same time, they need to loosen a bit, don't you think?
Goose Gossage is a Hall of Famer. Period. There have been a handful of closers in the history of baseball that were above and beyond their peers and Gossage was among those chosen few.
No, he was not as dominant statistically as Rollie Fingers and surely was not what Dennis Eckersley was and Mariano Rivera is but he's just a notch below. Gossage was a closer when that really meant something. Goose would collect two and sometimes three inning saves routinely--and not just once in a while like current closers--no, not Goose, he would do it all the time. As did all those original "closers" like Fingers and Sutter, Quisenberry, Reardon and Lee Smith.
Cooperstown cannot continue to ignore positions that truly impact the game. No, closers don't pitch complete games or even play every day, but ask anyone who knows and you'll quickly discover that they have meant the world to teams they have closed for, and in some cases, put those clubs over the top.
Fingers was a great closer for some great Oakland teams but it was his presence that put the Milwaukee Brewers over the top and into the playoffs in 1981 and helped them reach the World Series in 1982. Gossage did the same thing for the San Diego Padres in 1984. With the Yankees he was just another great player, but with the Pads, they needed leadership, they needed someone to "come with it" and show the rest of the National League that they were equals. Goose Gossage did that.
Intimidation matters. Sure, it's not a statistic and you can't put somebody into the Hall because they were intimidating but you can when that intimidation is a partnership of presence and ability. Rob Dibble was terrific for a short time and surely intimidating but no one would say he was worthy of enshrinement.
Goose Gossage, however, was intimidatingly talented over two decades. His presence combined with his capabilities on the mound made for a daunting figure, and don't think for a moment some of his 310 career saves didn't come at the expense of a batter or two that were made to feel uneasy at the plate. Not uneasy like John Kruk facing Randy Johnson at the 1993 All-Star Game but uncomfortable just the same. The fu-manchu 'stache didn't hurt, either.
Goose Gossage belongs with the elite of the game and he's growing irritated with the process. I can't say as I blame him. The writers have become so preoccupied with their own power regarding the voting that, in my humble opinion, things have grown laughable.
Yes, I said laughable. The writers seem so hell bent on numbers so, let's take a quick peek at them, shall we?
While Gossage had 31 fewer saves than Fingers (341) he closed 10 more than Sutter (300). Goose was an All-Star nine times--three more times than both Fingers and Sutter. Goose logged 22 years in the majors--five more than Fingers and 10 more than Sutter--but he wasn't necessarily a closer those final years and it's the Bert Blyleven argument: a guy shouldn't have it held against him that he was productive for a long period of time. Matter of fact, Gossage should be applauded that he posted a 2.84 ERA in 30 games with Oakland in 1990 at the age of 40. Apparently, the writers think Goose was "padding stats" late in his career.
Gossage had just as many 30 save seasons as Fingers (2) while Sutter had four and Goose led the league in saves three times just like Fingers though Sutter led it five times. Gossage pitched in 1002 games--58 more than Fingers and a whopping 341 more than Sutter, and while his career ERA was just over three runs per (3.01), we can't forget that from 1977 to 1985 his earned run average only crept over 2.62 once, in 1984 in registered at 2.90. And, while we're on stats, note Gossage's career ended with a winning record (124-107) and Hall of Famers Rollie Fingers and Bruce Sutter had losing records.
Let me put it another way. Remember the debates two years ago in the NFL? The question surrounded the Indianapolis Colts and whether they could finish undefeated. Many scoffed at the idea because they weren't better than the '85 Bears and surely weren't in the same league with the '72 Dolphins. Almost to an "expert", the conversation made its way to comparisons with the Colts and those teams of yesteryear. The direct question was not whether the Colts were the best team of all-time or even better than those Chicago or Miami squads--it was simply: can they run the table?
Same thinking applies to Goose Gossage--the question is not whether he was superior to Fingers or Sutter or Hoyt Wilhelm or Eckersley or even Rivera--the question, rather, is this: was Goose Gossage in their class?
Rather than wrangle over criteria for another eight years like the writers let's just call for an 0-2, two out heater from the Goose up and in and get this over with.
Watch that wild wind-up one more time, reach back and pound it in for a swinging strike three. The Goose closed out another one. Now go shake his hand.
Last edited by SouthPaw : 01-12-2007 at 10:08 PM.
|
What's Good For the Goose...?
Linear Mode
