Hi everyone. This is just my humble opinion on the subject. I don't think in a conversation where we're talking about some of the greatest of all ime pitchers that someone who had only 1-3 great seasons should be even mentioned in the conversation. I think a perfect example of that is Roger Maris. He had a few great seasons. He was also the only slugger to break The Babes's record (even though, he played in more games to do it). Roger Maris' accomplishment has withstood the test of time. It took 34 years for someone for Maris to finally shatter The Babe's record. After Maris broke the record, it took another 37 years and a bunch of players on steroids to break Maris' record. Maris did have a few great seasons, and held on to one of the greatest records in baseball for 37 years, but does that make him a hall of famer? Does that make him one of the greatest sluggers of all time? no, it doesn't. There are a bunch of reasons that can be named why he is not in the Hall of Fame. He was never been a .300 hitter not even in the season he broke the Babe's record. And in the 11 years he played, he only has compiled 275 homeruns. His fielding stats were not great either.
But then, another aspect are people who have extremely long careers and eventually over long periods of time are able to compile great numers. There are some pitchers and sluggers as well who fall into this category such as Ryan and Palmeiro. If these two were not "freaks of nature" who were able to stay healthy and durable for such a long time, they would not have been able to compile such numbers. I know eventually that Palmeiro will end up in the HOF, because of his numbers (3020 hits, 569 homeruns) but it took him 19 years of being a good player to do it. He did have a few great seasons, but by that time he most likely was juiced up like everyone else. Where do people who fall into these categories stand? Anyway, I'm going to stop rambling on. Just my $.02.