That's What Cheesehead: 38.52 - Wright Hangs Them Up For Good

[7teen]

He'll always be remembered for his outstanding 2001 season as a Madison Wolves pitcher moreso than his coaching career in the Wolves minor league system and his stint as pitching coach with the Madison Wolves. But one of the Wolves' greatest players and coaches for more than 2 decades has finally decided to hang up his cleats for good as Jessie Wright announced this week that he is retiring as the pitching coach of the Burlington Big Eyed Fish, the Wolves' AA affiliate.

The 65 year old Wright had been a coach in the Wolves system for close to 20 years since retiring from his BBA playing days in 2010 (I can't be exact as I can't seem to find his coaching page anymore.) He started his career in the lower rungs of the Wolves farm system before spending a brief period of time with the Wolves big league club before re-joining the minor league ranks for the latter parts of his coaching career. But it's not his coaching career that many Wolves fans will remember.

Instead, they'll remember the two Landis Titles he helped lead the Wolves to in 2004 and 2009. They'll remember the pair of Steve Nebraska Awards he won in 2001 and 2003. They'll remember the four all-star games he played in. They'll remember his team hall of fame induction as one of the original 5 inducted. But truth be told, they'll most likely remember him for that magical 2001 season where he captivated not just Madison Wolves fans but the entire BBA World when he reeled of 30 victories in a season to break and set the BBA record for wins in a season.

"It was a remarkable run" said Wright looking back on it after announcing he was retiring from coaching and baseball for good this week. Wright cited just wanting to have some retirmenet time as his reasoning. "If I recall, I had a decision nearly every game that season and they just always seemed like we were on the winning side when I took the mound."

Wright made 36 starts in 2001 and finished with a 30-2 record.

[RonCo]

Tips hat....

Thanks for writing this. I hadn't really registered this.

[indiansfan]

He belongs in the Hall of Fame. The guy is the only guy in league history to win 30 in a season. He went 30-2, 2.15 ERA, and 302 K's. Even Steve Nebraska never won 30. I don't recall whether the veterans committee put him up again or not, but I'd vote for him again. Rasmussen too.

[Ted]

He belongs in the Hall of Fame. The guy is the only guy in league history to win 30 in a season. He went 30-2, 2.15 ERA, and 302 K's. Even Steve Nebraska never won 30. I don't recall whether the veterans committee put him up again or not, but I'd vote for him again. Rasmussen too.

Good ol' HOF arguments. You know I can't resist. Wright had some amazing seasons. But he was only a good pitcher for seven or eight seasons. He played a long time and piled up numbers, but for half the seasons he played he was average or outright bad. Still, his peak is high enough that I'd consider him. But I'd lean towards no. The 30-2 year is amazing, but that's the one argument that puts him towards the hall. The non wins and losses part of the stat line is impressive. The IP, K's, FIP, ERA etc, all make it a great year. But it's been matched a number of times and bested some others. I'm not saying it's not an amazing year. They question is, do you put a guy for one season during which he set a record? Because that's what you'd be doing. Everything else about Wright is a typical early career stud who falls off a cliff and ends up in the hall of very good class.

Still, that one year is tough. I know some people value pitcher win more than I do, but how many of those wins are due to an offense that had Puckett, Kengos, and Vanderhugen. That's three inner circle hall of famers, and arguably the two best hitters to ever play. Three other hitters on that team has all star caliber years.

I do agree about Rasmussen. He should absolutely be in.

[7teen]

I've dropped the debating over either. Obviously I think they're HOFs but I'm biased. Rasmussen had the career longevity numbers while Wright had the short term dominance. Had Rasmussen won some individual accolades during his time then perhaps he'd already be in.

But both pitched during a time when Larry LaSalle, Robbie Sergent] and Jay Lee were also dominating the JL circuit.

[Ted]

I've dropped the debating over either. Obviously I think they're HOFs but I'm biased. Rasmussen had the career longevity numbers while Wright had the short term dominance. Had Rasmussen won some individual accolades during his time then perhaps he'd already be in.

But both pitched during a time when Larry LaSalle, Robbie Sergent] and Jay Lee were also dominating the JL circuit.

Were they up for the HOF initially during one of the periods we had the ranking system for voting? I feel like you mentioned that in the past, and that stinks, because that system only works for a really small hall. I feel like Rasmussen came up as a vet selection and got no traction, and that sucks. It seems like no one ever votes for the vets Recte puts on the ballot. I don't know why that is. He should be in.

As for Wright, he's just so tough. That peak is as good as you could ever want. It's even inner circle HOF good if he's just an above average player for 6-7 more years. He just wasn't. He was mediocre to bad. And that just stinks. Do you put a guy in simply because of his short term dominance and that one really amazing year? I'd definitely do it before I put in a guy who just hung around forever and was never great and piled up a bunch of counting stats. You could convince me on Wright, I think. Maybe.

[7teen]

I've dropped the debating over either. Obviously I think they're HOFs but I'm biased. Rasmussen had the career longevity numbers while Wright had the short term dominance. Had Rasmussen won some individual accolades during his time then perhaps he'd already be in.

But both pitched during a time when Larry LaSalle, Robbie Sergent] and Jay Lee were also dominating the JL circuit.

Were they up for the HOF initially during one of the periods we had the ranking system for voting? I feel like you mentioned that in the past, and that stinks, because that system only works for a really small hall. I feel like Rasmussen came up as a vet selection and got no traction, and that sucks. It seems like no one ever votes for the vets Recte puts on the ballot. I don't know why that is. He should be in.

As for Wright, he's just so tough. That peak is as good as you could ever want. It's even inner circle HOF good if he's just an above average player for 6-7 more years. He just wasn't. He was mediocre to bad. And that just stinks. Do you put a guy in simply because of his short term dominance and that one really amazing year? I'd definitely do it before I put in a guy who just hung around forever and was never great and piled up a bunch of counting stats. You could convince me on Wright, I think. Maybe.

If my memory serves correct, Rasmussen's time on the ballot was during the ranking system. When he was a vet selection, that ballot was also a ranking system. Rasmussen was never on a ballot where voters voted for everyone they felt was worthy of inclusion. I think his Vet year he finished as high as 4th of the 15 names but that wasn't enough to get him in.

[Ted]

I've dropped the debating over either. Obviously I think they're HOFs but I'm biased. Rasmussen had the career longevity numbers while Wright had the short term dominance. Had Rasmussen won some individual accolades during his time then perhaps he'd already be in.

But both pitched during a time when Larry LaSalle, Robbie Sergent] and Jay Lee were also dominating the JL circuit.

Were they up for the HOF initially during one of the periods we had the ranking system for voting? I feel like you mentioned that in the past, and that stinks, because that system only works for a really small hall. I feel like Rasmussen came up as a vet selection and got no traction, and that sucks. It seems like no one ever votes for the vets Recte puts on the ballot. I don't know why that is. He should be in.

As for Wright, he's just so tough. That peak is as good as you could ever want. It's even inner circle HOF good if he's just an above average player for 6-7 more years. He just wasn't. He was mediocre to bad. And that just stinks. Do you put a guy in simply because of his short term dominance and that one really amazing year? I'd definitely do it before I put in a guy who just hung around forever and was never great and piled up a bunch of counting stats. You could convince me on Wright, I think. Maybe.

If my memory serves correct, Rasmussen's time on the ballot was during the ranking system. When he was a vet selection, that ballot was also a ranking system. Rasmussen was never on a ballot where voters voted for everyone they felt was worthy of inclusion. I think his Vet year he finished as high as 4th of the 15 names but that wasn't enough to get him in.

I'd love to start over on the vet system, do it like we do the ballot now, and never include a guy without introduction, discussion, etc. Maybe even make it a separate ballot. I'm torn on this, because I like seeing the players with the current HOF candidates, although Randy's excellent HOF work maybe makes this less necessary. As you point out with Rasmussen, some of these guys never got a fair shake.

[7teen]

Actually I stand corrected. I went back and looked and both were on ballots where total number of votes could get you in. It appears Rasmussen nor Wright ever got more than 6 votes on a ballot.

I must say that shocks me even more now looking back on it. haha

[7teen]

Jessie Wright got as many as 11 votes 50% on one ballot. He fluctuated as high as 11 and as few as 4 over the span of 6-7 ballots.

Looks like Rasmussen was between 4 and no higher than 8 on any ballot. I do recall Rasmussen's vet committee year he was on a ranking ballot though but not sure what year that was to find the results.

[usnspecialist]

Were they up for the HOF initially during one of the periods we had the ranking system for voting? I feel like you mentioned that in the past, and that stinks, because that system only works for a really small hall. I feel like Rasmussen came up as a vet selection and got no traction, and that sucks. It seems like no one ever votes for the vets Recte puts on the ballot. I don't know why that is. He should be in.

As for Wright, he's just so tough. That peak is as good as you could ever want. It's even inner circle HOF good if he's just an above average player for 6-7 more years. He just wasn't. He was mediocre to bad. And that just stinks. Do you put a guy in simply because of his short term dominance and that one really amazing year? I'd definitely do it before I put in a guy who just hung around forever and was never great and piled up a bunch of counting stats. You could convince me on Wright, I think. Maybe.

If my memory serves correct, Rasmussen's time on the ballot was during the ranking system. When he was a vet selection, that ballot was also a ranking system. Rasmussen was never on a ballot where voters voted for everyone they felt was worthy of inclusion. I think his Vet year he finished as high as 4th of the 15 names but that wasn't enough to get him in.

I'd love to start over on the vet system, do it like we do the ballot now, and never include a guy without introduction, discussion, etc. Maybe even make it a separate ballot. I'm torn on this, because I like seeing the players with the current HOF candidates, although Randy's excellent HOF work maybe makes this less necessary. As you point out with Rasmussen, some of these guys never got a fair shake.

thank you for reminding me that I need to do that this offseason with some guys that are not currently in the HOF....