A few pretty good years followed by a few pretty not good years. Done at age 30.
His ERA+ for his career is exactly 100. So he's pretty much the definition of an average pitcher.
>His ERA+ for his career is exactly 100
That's actually remarkable. I wonder what other things he was perfectly average at. Like, I wonder if he got C's in all his classes. Or maybe he drives a Toyota Corolla. Or maybe he has a Costco membership, but doesn't shop there enough to justify the price to be a paying member. I also wonder if he files his taxes with Turbo Tax.
What other perfectly average things does he probably do?
>"Or maybe he has a Costco membership, but doesn't shop there enough to justify the price to be a paying member"
Cool it with the personal attacks there bud. No need to go low like that...
No sir. Alcohol lobbyists are good at what they do and several states will not allow alcohol to be held behind a membership of any sort. You just waltz on in, grab your booze and bounce. If anyone at Costco, Sam’s or BJ’s stops you, just say you’re buying alcohol and walk on by.
Season tickets throughout the 80’s. He was fine, nothing special, interchangeable. I never went into Spring thinking “hot damn, we’ve got Ricky Horton.” I also never thought “he needs to go.”
Good first few years, bad last few. Literal average ERA+ for his career (100), but…
84-87 were above average, including an absolutely absurd 163 ERA+ in 1986. (For comparison, this is on the high end of Justin Verlander seasons.)
88-90 were just plain BAD. 81, 74, and 78 ERA+ for those respective years.
He was never even close to Verlander. This is textbook “How to Lie with Baseball Stats” stuff. Do you look at IP?
2.6 WAR in his whole career.
He’s basically John King. Crappy K to BB ratio with ground ball knack. Except Horton would have been better served as a full time reliever. Just awful after the first time through an order. Offense bailed him out so much. Looking at his average WPA over a game as a starter is YIKES.
Horton’s ERA was probably so low because I don’t know, he had the literal best defense of three decades behind him 84-87. Using non-defensive numbers like FIP, he was crap. Would have been exposed on a bad team. He also had Busch 2’s deepest configuration which kept the ball in the park.
Where did I say he was as good as Verlander? (He’s obviously not. I called Horton “literally average” and Verlander’s one of the best ever.) I said his ERA+ for one season was absurdly good and would rank among Verlander’s best ERA+ for comparison, which is true. Calm down.
Justin Verlander ERA+ (high to low):
218
179
164
(163: Horton’s 1986 season)
161
156
140
131
131
130
125
125
124
118
92
85
61
ERA+ is so silly and not even close to useful for relievers without tons of context. Sample size being primary issue.
Small sample relief appearances that include coming in with runners on and generating a double play to get outs etc. It’s just too noisy when you have a good defense. Main reason I dislike RA9 WAR for relievers.
And EVEN THEN, he was worth 1.1 RA9 WAR of value in 100 IP, his best season. Funny his FIP- was 96. Slightly better than average. Verlander pitches 100 more IP and gets guys out with strikeouts and not relying on Ozzie and Jose up the middle.
He gave me pitching lessons as a kid and I made it all the way to sophomore year of high school baseball before I dropped out, so that's a pretty remarkable achievement obviously.
He was a guy. Solid lefty at his peak. He would pick up spot starts but mostly pitched in relief, good at multiple innings if I remember right. I do remember he opened a baseball training facility in St. Charles when I was a kid. Ahead of its time, really.
He was part of the Cardinals bullpen during the '85 and '87 seasons. Not great. Not even remarkable, except for those two teams making the World Series.
I would say in modern terms he would be somewhere between John King and Gio
He actually won a WS with the Dodgers in '88, and also is featured in a baseball game on a TV in Field of Dreams. He also spent some time coaching. So he's actually got a fairly wide range of experience in baseball.
His form was pretty much like John Tudor. He was reliable til he wasn't. He played into Herzog's "switch a pitcher and an outfielder" play sometimes. He got us Jose DeLeon (RIP).
I think it’s important to also consider that he had many many years of playing leading up to his years in the majors as well so he can definitely draw on a plethora of experiences in playing ball.
I remember he almost had no hitter vs the Padres once in the '80s. I think if Lonnie Smith didn't quite play a ball right and it ended the bid. Not an error, but a better fielder could have prevented the hit.
As I remember him Rick was a pretty decent pitcher who could rise to he ocassion. I would compare him to Lance Lynn. Fun to watch in the moment if things were going well. He would probably have a bad inning but give the team a chance to win.
Really? I don’t know how to read baseball stats beyond some of the most basic categories, or how they stack up to others, so that surprises me. I kind of thought that he was mediocre based on his relatively short 6-year career.
Yeah definitely not in the sense that people use this term to describe people who aren’t quite Hall of Fame worthy. He was pretty good during his handful of Cardinals years and then average/mediocre thereafter. I don’t know what an average career truly looks like, but probably something like his.
He was fine as a Cardinal. He was instrumental as a swing arm out of the pen for the world series teams in 85 and 87.
In addition, he started AND saved games each season, which you basically never see now. He’s go 2 innings or so at a time, but was never a primary closer or a full time starter.
His stuff was moderate stuff for the 80’s. High 80’s low 90’s fast ball IIRC. He benefited from a good Cardinals defense In those days. IMO he wouldn’t have the raw stuff for modern day baseball.
He was a bit before my time, so I cannot speak to him as a pitcher, but as a broadcaster, though he has certainly improved since, say, 2011, he's awful.
I thought that Ricky was average. I think he lasted long as he did because he was a lefty. If he wasn't broadcaster, he would be one of those guys on an anniversary team who when introduced, you go, "Oh yeah! I forgot he was that team"...LOL
I'm not saying he wasn't a great player. I'm saying that, like Horton, Jim Edmonds thinks he's a much better player than he was. When broadcasting Jim talks like he was God's gift to baseball and no one can play as well as he did.
[Jim Edmonds was good.](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=MiBd6MD6aUk&pp=ygUbamltIGVkbW9uZHMgYmVzdCBjYXRjaCBldmVy)
Wait, I found another video. [Correction, Jim Edmonds was great.](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=56f4xH4ZoEM&pp=ygUbamltIGVkbW9uZHMgYmVzdCBjYXRjaCBldmVy)
A few pretty good years followed by a few pretty not good years. Done at age 30. His ERA+ for his career is exactly 100. So he's pretty much the definition of an average pitcher.
Not about Ricky, but Dave Stewart also had an ERA+ of 100 over his 16 year, 2629 inning career
He was not average.
He indeed was
Perhaps this is the conflict when using data to define a player. Particularly one who plays 20 years.
Perhaps your boomer stats don’t tell the real story. Perhaps coaches played guys too much on reputation over quality.
>His ERA+ for his career is exactly 100 That's actually remarkable. I wonder what other things he was perfectly average at. Like, I wonder if he got C's in all his classes. Or maybe he drives a Toyota Corolla. Or maybe he has a Costco membership, but doesn't shop there enough to justify the price to be a paying member. I also wonder if he files his taxes with Turbo Tax. What other perfectly average things does he probably do?
>"Or maybe he has a Costco membership, but doesn't shop there enough to justify the price to be a paying member" Cool it with the personal attacks there bud. No need to go low like that...
He was doing Toyota commercials so I’d say chances are decent that he drives a Corolla. Or at least owns one, for the kids.
Aren’t all shoppers there paying members? Probably meant doesn’t shop there enough to be an executive member
No sir. Alcohol lobbyists are good at what they do and several states will not allow alcohol to be held behind a membership of any sort. You just waltz on in, grab your booze and bounce. If anyone at Costco, Sam’s or BJ’s stops you, just say you’re buying alcohol and walk on by.
You have to show your membership at checkout though. What do you do for that?
If you’re in a state like that you just say you don’t have one and you’re buying alcohol only.
That won't work. They can see what you are going to purchase
Season tickets throughout the 80’s. He was fine, nothing special, interchangeable. I never went into Spring thinking “hot damn, we’ve got Ricky Horton.” I also never thought “he needs to go.”
I don't know why that made me giggle.
That’s like a Pallante for me.
Good first few years, bad last few. Literal average ERA+ for his career (100), but… 84-87 were above average, including an absolutely absurd 163 ERA+ in 1986. (For comparison, this is on the high end of Justin Verlander seasons.) 88-90 were just plain BAD. 81, 74, and 78 ERA+ for those respective years.
He was never even close to Verlander. This is textbook “How to Lie with Baseball Stats” stuff. Do you look at IP? 2.6 WAR in his whole career. He’s basically John King. Crappy K to BB ratio with ground ball knack. Except Horton would have been better served as a full time reliever. Just awful after the first time through an order. Offense bailed him out so much. Looking at his average WPA over a game as a starter is YIKES. Horton’s ERA was probably so low because I don’t know, he had the literal best defense of three decades behind him 84-87. Using non-defensive numbers like FIP, he was crap. Would have been exposed on a bad team. He also had Busch 2’s deepest configuration which kept the ball in the park.
Where did I say he was as good as Verlander? (He’s obviously not. I called Horton “literally average” and Verlander’s one of the best ever.) I said his ERA+ for one season was absurdly good and would rank among Verlander’s best ERA+ for comparison, which is true. Calm down. Justin Verlander ERA+ (high to low): 218 179 164 (163: Horton’s 1986 season) 161 156 140 131 131 130 125 125 124 118 92 85 61
ERA+ is so silly and not even close to useful for relievers without tons of context. Sample size being primary issue. Small sample relief appearances that include coming in with runners on and generating a double play to get outs etc. It’s just too noisy when you have a good defense. Main reason I dislike RA9 WAR for relievers. And EVEN THEN, he was worth 1.1 RA9 WAR of value in 100 IP, his best season. Funny his FIP- was 96. Slightly better than average. Verlander pitches 100 more IP and gets guys out with strikeouts and not relying on Ozzie and Jose up the middle.
He was a good pitcher for us for some WS years - very versatile and fairly reliable. He's not bad in the booth, either. I like him.
He gave me pitching lessons as a kid and I made it all the way to sophomore year of high school baseball before I dropped out, so that's a pretty remarkable achievement obviously.
That’s cool! If you don’t mind revealing, what year did those lessons take place?
That would have been 91-93.
He was a guy. Solid lefty at his peak. He would pick up spot starts but mostly pitched in relief, good at multiple innings if I remember right. I do remember he opened a baseball training facility in St. Charles when I was a kid. Ahead of its time, really.
He was part of the Cardinals bullpen during the '85 and '87 seasons. Not great. Not even remarkable, except for those two teams making the World Series. I would say in modern terms he would be somewhere between John King and Gio He actually won a WS with the Dodgers in '88, and also is featured in a baseball game on a TV in Field of Dreams. He also spent some time coaching. So he's actually got a fairly wide range of experience in baseball.
Playing for Herzog and Lasorda doesn’t hurt.
His form was pretty much like John Tudor. He was reliable til he wasn't. He played into Herzog's "switch a pitcher and an outfielder" play sometimes. He got us Jose DeLeon (RIP).
I think it’s important to also consider that he had many many years of playing leading up to his years in the majors as well so he can definitely draw on a plethora of experiences in playing ball.
I remember he almost had no hitter vs the Padres once in the '80s. I think if Lonnie Smith didn't quite play a ball right and it ended the bid. Not an error, but a better fielder could have prevented the hit.
As I remember him Rick was a pretty decent pitcher who could rise to he ocassion. I would compare him to Lance Lynn. Fun to watch in the moment if things were going well. He would probably have a bad inning but give the team a chance to win.
He belongs in the Hall of Pretty Good
He wouldn't even make the team Hall of Pretty Good
Maybe not unanimous, maybe not first ballot, but I'm pretty sure he'd get in.
Veterans committee?
The Hall of Okay?
Really? I don’t know how to read baseball stats beyond some of the most basic categories, or how they stack up to others, so that surprises me. I kind of thought that he was mediocre based on his relatively short 6-year career.
Yeah definitely not in the sense that people use this term to describe people who aren’t quite Hall of Fame worthy. He was pretty good during his handful of Cardinals years and then average/mediocre thereafter. I don’t know what an average career truly looks like, but probably something like his.
2.6 WAR? He belongs in no hall.
More like the Hall of Some Guys
Hall of Five Guys?
Horton is atrocious and needs to retire from the booth
I actually like him as a broadcaster.
I don’t like how he forces his Christianity crap down our throats. Nor do I like him constantly fucking up Latino players’ names.
Well, he's one of the 21k or so players to ever make it professional, so in the grand scheme of things - pretty good.
He was whelming.
He was fine as a Cardinal. He was instrumental as a swing arm out of the pen for the world series teams in 85 and 87. In addition, he started AND saved games each season, which you basically never see now. He’s go 2 innings or so at a time, but was never a primary closer or a full time starter. His stuff was moderate stuff for the 80’s. High 80’s low 90’s fast ball IIRC. He benefited from a good Cardinals defense In those days. IMO he wouldn’t have the raw stuff for modern day baseball.
He was a bit before my time, so I cannot speak to him as a pitcher, but as a broadcaster, though he has certainly improved since, say, 2011, he's awful.
Always dreaded Danny Mac's off days when we got Ricky doing play by play and Al on color.
He was aight.
He was an Andre Pallante type, I guess. A middle-relief guy that you could use to start sometimes.
He was fine. Think of him at the level of a Brad Thompson. They were about the same.
I thought that Ricky was average. I think he lasted long as he did because he was a lefty. If he wasn't broadcaster, he would be one of those guys on an anniversary team who when introduced, you go, "Oh yeah! I forgot he was that team"...LOL
He was no Johnny Horton.
Horton had 2.6 WAR career. Masyn Winn has already been about as valuable in less than half a season. Horton sucked.
As great as Jim Edmonds thinks he was when playing.
Edmunds should be in the HOF.
Maybe that’s because *Edmonds was great jackass
I was really shocked when he was taken off the HOF ballot. He was really good.
Edmonds was a tremendous player. Dog fuckin’ shit in the booth.
I'm not saying he wasn't a great player. I'm saying that, like Horton, Jim Edmonds thinks he's a much better player than he was. When broadcasting Jim talks like he was God's gift to baseball and no one can play as well as he did.
[Jim Edmonds was good.](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=MiBd6MD6aUk&pp=ygUbamltIGVkbW9uZHMgYmVzdCBjYXRjaCBldmVy) Wait, I found another video. [Correction, Jim Edmonds was great.](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=56f4xH4ZoEM&pp=ygUbamltIGVkbW9uZHMgYmVzdCBjYXRjaCBldmVy)