Mark Belanger had 392 RAR, Ozzie Smith 734, Rabbit Maranville 410, Bill Mazeroski 350, Brooks Robinson 755, Andruw Jones 654, and Omar Vizquel 479.
I don't think it meaningfully affects my post, but I said "RAR" when I meant "oRAR" (offensive RAR). oRAR still includes a positional adjustment, but it doesn't include any of the other fielding metrics. For Cepeda, Perez, and Baines the two are more or less the same, since they don't pick up much or anything for fielding.
I spent a couple hours trying to come up with something close this morning. The closest I could come was Dave Kingman's sixteen years plus Yasiel Puig, but that's 23 years to Baines' 22. Mike Greenwell and John Jaha are 12 and 10 adding up to 22 seasons, but I didn't try to match seasons with them.
The point being that if you start with any legitimate HOF hitter, or even a borderline one, you're already head and shoulders above Baines and that just gets worse if you add another player. All you can do with Baines is split a long unremarkable career into two short unremarkable careers, as you found.
They don't line up perfectly, but if you start with the absolute worst HOFer - High Pockets Kelly - you can add Don Mincher and get pretty close to Harold Baines. And that's fitting because Mincher, like Baines, spent a big chunk of his career platooning, so he isn't really as good as his rate stats make him appear.
This is for you @thisistheshow - Jim Rice was actually a pretty good player.
Dwight Evans and Dave Parker are very good comparisons for Harold Baines hitting wise. Add multiple Gold Gloves for both of them and they should be in before Baines is even considered.
Dave Parker should be in the HoF. Dude was the best player in the league for a while and his defense was excellent too. DP should have been in before Baines was ever considered.
The ultimate goal of a pitcher is to get the batter out, and the most efficient way to accomplish that is via strikeout. Any other outcome can allow a run to score, such as on a groundout with a runner on third or a sacrifice fly. Plus, any ball put into play has the possibility of a defensive mistake - completely out of the pitcher's control.
Nolan Ryan struck out more batters than any other pitcher in history. Sure, he had a LONG career, but he was the league leader in K's on numerous occasions so it's not as if he built his record by being only slightly above average for 25+ seasons.
Then there is the 7 no-hitters. While no-hitters are generally flukey one-off's and not at all indicative of a pitcher's overall skill level, Ryan's 7 go well beyond a one night fluke and show an ability to dominate at any time.
My opinion is that, regardless of advanced stats, any comparison of Ryan to Caldwel/Forsch/Trachsel is completely off the mark.
@SoxPatsFan said:
Regarding the recent Nolan Ryan discussion.
The ultimate goal of a pitcher is to get the batter out, and the most efficient way to accomplish that is via strikeout. Any other outcome can allow a run to score, such as on a groundout with a runner on third or a sacrifice fly. Plus, any ball put into play has the possibility of a defensive mistake - completely out of the pitcher's control.
Nolan Ryan struck out more batters than any other pitcher in history. Sure, he had a LONG career, but he was the league leader in K's on numerous occasions so it's not as if he built his record by being only slightly above average for 25+ seasons.
Then there is the 7 no-hitters. While no-hitters are generally flukey one-off's and not at all indicative of a pitcher's overall skill level, Ryan's 7 go well beyond a one night fluke and show an ability to dominate at any time.
My opinion is that, regardless of advanced stats, any comparison of Ryan to Caldwel/Forsch/Trachsel is completely off the mark.
The ultimate goal of every pitcher is to stop runs from scoring. Sure, strikeouts are a great way to do that, but walking tons of batters is not, nor is giving up a ton of HR, and Ryan did all of the above. As I said, he's my favorite player of all time, and I do think he was a great pitcher, and well-deserving of the HOF. But he's nowhere close to the top group, including Seaver from his own time, and he's not as great as Blyleven and others in the next group down. No shame in that, and no shame intended; great pitcher, just not as great as he's often made out to be.
And just to be clear, I did not compare Ryan to Caldwell/Forsch/Trachsel, I compared the bottom half of his career to those guys, and the top half of his career to Saberhagen/Cone/Hamels. I consider the latter group worthy of HOF consideration, so the gap between Ryan and Caldwell/Forsch/Trachsel is large enough to fit a HOF career in it.
This is for you @thisistheshow - Jim Rice was actually a pretty good player.
Nolan Ryan's strikeout record can be put into perspective this way: if a pitcher strikes out 300/season for 19 consecutive seasons...a pitcher would still be 14 KKs short of his record and 300 KKs in just one season is no small task.
The same goes for Pete Rose base hits record: if a batter has 200 hits per season for 21 consecutive seasons...he would still be 56 hits short and likewise 200 hits/season is no small feat.
Both records will be very, very difficult to beat.
@gameusedhoop said:
Dwight Evans and Dave Parker are very good comparisons for Harold Baines hitting wise. Add multiple Gold Gloves for both of them and they should be in before Baines is even considered.
Evans was a MUCH better hitter than Baines and Parker. Parker was only average defensively, even including 1975 and 1977. Evans was better there, too. But it doesn't take much to show that Baines is a poor choice for the HoF.
If Jack Morris is on the committee, and he's sick of being the worst pitcher in the HOF, who might he let in? Time to buy those Doyle Alexander rookie cards!
This is for you @thisistheshow - Jim Rice was actually a pretty good player.
@coolstanley said:
Next year I think Dave Parker is on the 70's players hof list. I hope he finally gets in.
Next year they will vote on non-players only (I know, booooo!). The following year, the ballot will be made up of players who made their greatest contributions prior to 1980. And then this 3-year cycle will start again, unless the change up the voting eras yet again, which happens all the time. So, Parker would seem to have a bit of a wait before he can get nominated again. I do hope he gets in eventually.
"My father would womanize, he would drink. He would make outrageous claims like he invented the question mark. Sometimes he would accuse chestnuts of being lazy. The sort of general malaise that only the genius possess and the insane lament. Our childhood was typical. Summers in Rangoon, luge lessons. In the spring we'd make meat helmets. When we were insolent we were placed in a burlap bag and beaten with reeds - pretty standard really."
I took a look at the voting committee (see below) for the players on the Contemporary Era ballot, and 2 things stuck out to me. One, McGriff and Murphy would both seem to have an excellent chance to get in with Maddux and Chipper Jones voting for them. I previously thought the Crime Dog had the best chance to get in. I think he's pretty close to a lock now.
Two, the steroid guys will have a tough time getting enough votes given that Sandberg and Frank Thomas, perhaps the 2 players most outspoken against PEDs, are on the committee. Any additional thoughts on the committee and who may be favored to get in based on those who comprise it? Committee members:
Chipper Jones, Greg Maddux, Jack Morris, Ryne Sandberg, Lee Smith, Frank Thomas, Alan Trammell, Paul Beeston, Theo Epstein, Arte Moreno, Kim Ng, Dave St. Peter, Ken Williams, Steve Hirdt, LaVelle Neal and Susan Slusser.
One other note - Greg Maddux is on record as saying that players who would have made the HOF without the help of PEDs (like Clemens and Bonds) should get in, and that those who were presumably only stars because of PEDs should not.
"My father would womanize, he would drink. He would make outrageous claims like he invented the question mark. Sometimes he would accuse chestnuts of being lazy. The sort of general malaise that only the genius possess and the insane lament. Our childhood was typical. Summers in Rangoon, luge lessons. In the spring we'd make meat helmets. When we were insolent we were placed in a burlap bag and beaten with reeds - pretty standard really."
and that those who were presumably only stars because of PEDs should not.
Who would those players be?
Well, exactly. IMO, we can start with David Ortiz. Regardless what you think about Ortiz' election, it should be clear to absolutely everyone that he was not on a Hall of Fame trajectory at the end of his six years in Minnesota.
and that those who were presumably only stars because of PEDs should not.
Who would those players be?
Well, exactly. IMO, we can start with David Ortiz. Regardless what you think about Ortiz' election, it should be clear to absolutely everyone that he was not on a Hall of Fame trajectory at the end of his six years in Minnesota.
C'mon, guys who play defense worse than a man with no legs while hitting 20 homers or less are clearly what the HOF is all about.
Well, exactly. IMO, we can start with David Ortiz. Regardless what you think about Ortiz' election, it should be clear to absolutely everyone that he was not on a Hall of Fame trajectory at the end of his six years in Minnesota.
>
>
What you say about Ortiz is undeniable.
There's A LOT more to it than that.
As a Twins fan and a fan of the Home Run, I saw Ortiz hit some absolute laser beam home runs. The guy had awesome power!
Twins coaches at the time we're trying to get ALL their hitters to draw walks and hit to the opposite field. Ridiculous! David was also injured a few times, and when in the lineup, seemed to be hitting either .400 or .200 (too often .200). I was hoping the Twins would keep him as their everyday 1B, but they decided to get rid of him.
His SLG was getting better his final 3 seasons and was a very nice .500 in his final year here.
Was he a cheater? I don't know, but he did have tremendous power when he was here. The idiots that tried to change the way he hit were a big part of the problem.
2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set
and that those who were presumably only stars because of PEDs should not.
Who would those players be?
I don't know. You'd have to ask Greg.
"My father would womanize, he would drink. He would make outrageous claims like he invented the question mark. Sometimes he would accuse chestnuts of being lazy. The sort of general malaise that only the genius possess and the insane lament. Our childhood was typical. Summers in Rangoon, luge lessons. In the spring we'd make meat helmets. When we were insolent we were placed in a burlap bag and beaten with reeds - pretty standard really."
To not elect Curt Schilling to the HOF is, to me, worse than electing borderline players like Baines or Kaat.
Schilling has the resume, both regular season and playoffs. He is being kept out due to unpopular personal views that have nothing at all to do with baseball.
Hopefully having players on the committee that played against Schilling will right this wrong.
The HOF loses more credibility for who's not there more so than who is.
@SoxPatsFan said:
To not elect Curt Schilling to the HOF is, to me, worse than electing borderline players like Baines or Kaat.
Schilling has the resume, both regular season and playoffs. He is being kept out due to unpopular personal views that have nothing at all to do with baseball.
Hopefully having players on the committee that played against Schilling will right this wrong.
The HOF loses more credibility for who's not there more so than who is.
Schilling definitely deserves to be in, but it's not because of his personal views (I'm sure there are plenty of current players and HOFers that have very similar views). Schilling has seemingly spent every waking minute doing everything he can to piss off everyone he comes in contact with. He's about as unlikable a personality as anyone in any walk of life.
That alone isn't that big of a deal, because there are plenty of unlikable guys in the HoF. It is a dubious strategy for induction to be a jerk to everyone you ever met though, including teammates and voters.
The Vets Committee apparently thinks even less of Bonds and Clemens than the writers. Same goes for Schilling. Argue all you want but the lacks of votes speaks loud volumes
I did figure Mattingly and Murphy would garner more support but made only approx 40% or less of the ballots. Based on the low vote totals for all but McGriff I don't expect any of the rest to get in for the foreseeable future and not in this decade.
It's the singer not the song - Peter Townshend (1972)
I'm really glad the Crime Dog finally got in. That should have happened years ago. I wonder if Chipper Jones' absence hurt Dale Murphy's chances, though there's no way he would have swayed the voters enough to get Murph to 75%. Lastly, Curt Schilling absolutely belongs in the HOF based on his resume, but boy did he screw himself. All he had to do was keep his mouth shut after getting to 71% in his penultimate year on the regular ballot. Instead, he told the writers to go scratch because the veterans committee would vote him in instead. Didn't quite work out as he planned. I just hope he can zip it for the next few years so he can hopefully get in next time. Maybe show some humility. Something.
"My father would womanize, he would drink. He would make outrageous claims like he invented the question mark. Sometimes he would accuse chestnuts of being lazy. The sort of general malaise that only the genius possess and the insane lament. Our childhood was typical. Summers in Rangoon, luge lessons. In the spring we'd make meat helmets. When we were insolent we were placed in a burlap bag and beaten with reeds - pretty standard really."
@shagrotn77 said:
Lastly, Curt Schilling absolutely belongs in the HOF based on his resume, but boy did he screw himself. All he had to do was keep his mouth shut after getting to 71% in his penultimate year on the regular ballot. Instead, he told the writers to go scratch because the veterans committee would vote him in instead. Didn't quite work out as he planned. I just hope he can zip it for the next few years so he can hopefully get in next time. Maybe show some humility. Something.
He's not capable of that. If he was he would not be in the position in the first place. In fact I'd bet he doubles down on his mouthing off. My guess is he will be elected but not until after he leaves this mortal coil.
It's the singer not the song - Peter Townshend (1972)
@Tabe said:
Congrats to McGriff but it's weird to have Gaylord Perry and David Ortiz in the Hall but not Clemens and Bonds.
Yup. Makes no sense.
Does not bode well for Bonds or Clemens in the future based on them doing worse with the committee than they did with the writers.
Their only hope is a committee with different members, which is likely since these committees are comprised of different people all the time. Still, I think they're in for a (continued) long wait.
"My father would womanize, he would drink. He would make outrageous claims like he invented the question mark. Sometimes he would accuse chestnuts of being lazy. The sort of general malaise that only the genius possess and the insane lament. Our childhood was typical. Summers in Rangoon, luge lessons. In the spring we'd make meat helmets. When we were insolent we were placed in a burlap bag and beaten with reeds - pretty standard really."
Someone's McGriff Leaf PSA 10 finished at $1237 last night in time with the HOF announcement. I'm curious to see if that was a peak spike or if they'll be higher over the coming week. No doubt the graded POP is going to increase a bit in the coming months. It has me tempted to rip a couple of my '86 Leaf boxes now.
I knew Schilling talked his way out of the Hall with the writers, but surprising the doghouse he finds himself in with other players. Needs to hire Blyleven to campaign for him.
Also surprised the committee wasn't swayed by all the "Clemens was clean" threads on this board.
@GreenSneakers said:
I knew Schilling talked his way out of the Hall with the writers, but surprising the doghouse he finds himself in with other players. Needs to hire Blyleven to campaign for him.
Also surprised the committee wasn't swayed by all the "Clemens was clean" threads on this board.
They will probably do to Schilling to what they do in Football, and that's put him in when he is about 80. I was pissed when they waited so long to vote in long time Football GM Bobby Beathard. He clearly had already slipped mentally and if they had just voted him in 10 years earlier he could have really enjoyed it.
Successful coin BST transactions with Gerard and segoja.
Successful card BST transactions with cbcnow, brogurt, gstarling, Bravesfan 007, and rajah 424.
The treatment Schilling is getting is awful. If he had made his personal views public during his playing days I could understand it a little better, but something that happens well after a clean, clearly HOF caliber career shouldn't be disqualifying.
Now Schilling knows how much the writers AND former players don't like him, because his stats are worthy. Some folks just can't get out of their own way.
IMO, McGriff was about the fifth best 1B of his era not already enshrined. Hernandez was a little earlier, Giambi a little later. Palmeiro and McGwire have perceived PED problems, but why on earth put McGriff in before Will Clark and (especially) Olerud?
The committees should be disbanded and only meet every five years (ten would be better) to consider mostly people other than players. It makes no sense to put a Jack Morris in at the same time you deny the vastly superior Carlos Zambrano, Chris Carpenter, not to mention Johan Santana a second vote.
@daltex said:
IMO, McGriff was about the fifth best 1B of his era not already enshrined. Hernandez was a little earlier, Giambi a little later. Palmeiro and McGwire have perceived PED problems, but why on earth put McGriff in before Will Clark and (especially) Olerud?
The committees should be disbanded and only meet every five years (ten would be better) to consider mostly people other than players. It makes no sense to put a Jack Morris in at the same time you deny the vastly superior Carlos Zambrano, Chris Carpenter, not to mention Johan Santana a second vote.
You are putting too much stock into the defensive numbers.
McGriff has 10,174 career plate appearances and a 134 OPS+. Run Expectancy in all 24 base/out situations 494 Runs
Olerud has 9,063 career plate appearances and a 129 OPS+. Run Expectancy in all 24 base/out situations 405 Runs
Will clark has 8,283 career plate appearances and a 137 OPS+. Run Expectancy in all 24 base/out situations 455 Runs
There isn't enough defensive value from the same position to close the offensive lead that McGriff has over them.
They played in basically the same era.
One could construct a case that they are similar, but there is zero case that can be made that either Clark or Olerud were clearly better.
As it stands now, McGriff clearly has them beat in offense.
Whatever figure that WAR comes up with to turn that table would only include numbers with about a five percent validity.
PS
Keith Hernandez 8,553 career plate appearances 128 OPS+. Run Expectancy 408. He doesn't measure up either.
@1948_Swell_Robinson said:
.........McGriff has 10,174 career plate appearances and a 134 OPS+. Run Expectancy in all 24 base/out situations 494 Runs
Olerud has 9,063 career plate appearances and a 129 OPS+. Run Expectancy in all 24 base/out situations 405 Runs
Will clark has 8,283 career plate appearances and a 137 OPS+. Run Expectancy in all 24 base/out situations 455 Runs.........
Delgado has 8,657 career plate appearances and a 138 OPS+. Run Expectancy in all 24 base/out situations 480 Runs
Comments
I really like Jim Kaat, but the decision to put him in might be worse than Baines.
I don't think it meaningfully affects my post, but I said "RAR" when I meant "oRAR" (offensive RAR). oRAR still includes a positional adjustment, but it doesn't include any of the other fielding metrics. For Cepeda, Perez, and Baines the two are more or less the same, since they don't pick up much or anything for fielding.
The point being that if you start with any legitimate HOF hitter, or even a borderline one, you're already head and shoulders above Baines and that just gets worse if you add another player. All you can do with Baines is split a long unremarkable career into two short unremarkable careers, as you found.
They don't line up perfectly, but if you start with the absolute worst HOFer - High Pockets Kelly - you can add Don Mincher and get pretty close to Harold Baines. And that's fitting because Mincher, like Baines, spent a big chunk of his career platooning, so he isn't really as good as his rate stats make him appear.
Dwight Evans and Dave Parker are very good comparisons for Harold Baines hitting wise. Add multiple Gold Gloves for both of them and they should be in before Baines is even considered.
Dave Parker should be in the HoF. Dude was the best player in the league for a while and his defense was excellent too. DP should have been in before Baines was ever considered.
Regarding the recent Nolan Ryan discussion.
The ultimate goal of a pitcher is to get the batter out, and the most efficient way to accomplish that is via strikeout. Any other outcome can allow a run to score, such as on a groundout with a runner on third or a sacrifice fly. Plus, any ball put into play has the possibility of a defensive mistake - completely out of the pitcher's control.
Nolan Ryan struck out more batters than any other pitcher in history. Sure, he had a LONG career, but he was the league leader in K's on numerous occasions so it's not as if he built his record by being only slightly above average for 25+ seasons.
Then there is the 7 no-hitters. While no-hitters are generally flukey one-off's and not at all indicative of a pitcher's overall skill level, Ryan's 7 go well beyond a one night fluke and show an ability to dominate at any time.
My opinion is that, regardless of advanced stats, any comparison of Ryan to Caldwel/Forsch/Trachsel is completely off the mark.
The ultimate goal of every pitcher is to stop runs from scoring. Sure, strikeouts are a great way to do that, but walking tons of batters is not, nor is giving up a ton of HR, and Ryan did all of the above. As I said, he's my favorite player of all time, and I do think he was a great pitcher, and well-deserving of the HOF. But he's nowhere close to the top group, including Seaver from his own time, and he's not as great as Blyleven and others in the next group down. No shame in that, and no shame intended; great pitcher, just not as great as he's often made out to be.
And just to be clear, I did not compare Ryan to Caldwell/Forsch/Trachsel, I compared the bottom half of his career to those guys, and the top half of his career to Saberhagen/Cone/Hamels. I consider the latter group worthy of HOF consideration, so the gap between Ryan and Caldwell/Forsch/Trachsel is large enough to fit a HOF career in it.
Nolan Ryan's strikeout record can be put into perspective this way: if a pitcher strikes out 300/season for 19 consecutive seasons...a pitcher would still be 14 KKs short of his record and 300 KKs in just one season is no small task.
The same goes for Pete Rose base hits record: if a batter has 200 hits per season for 21 consecutive seasons...he would still be 56 hits short and likewise 200 hits/season is no small feat.
Both records will be very, very difficult to beat.
https://stathead.com/tiny/UqBxi
(See above.)
Evans was a MUCH better hitter than Baines and Parker. Parker was only average defensively, even including 1975 and 1977. Evans was better there, too. But it doesn't take much to show that Baines is a poor choice for the HoF.
I recently had opportunity to spend time socially with David Cone and he couldn't of been more gracious and realistic about the HOF. Class act.
^Good to hear.
The committee is:
Chipper Jones, Greg Maddux, Jack Morris, Ryne Sandberg, Lee Smith, Frank Thomas, and Allen Trammell
Execs
Paul Beeston, Theo Epstein, Arte Moreno, Kim Ng, Dave St. Parker, and Ken Williams
Media
Steve Hirdt, LaVelle Neal, and Susan Slusser.
Seems like it bodes well for McGriff at least.
I wish that committee was Survivor-style and they could vote Morris and Smith off the island.
Based on the committee, suggest now is time to buy your 77 Murphy's PSA 9.
If Jack Morris is on the committee, and he's sick of being the worst pitcher in the HOF, who might he let in? Time to buy those Doyle Alexander rookie cards!
Very distinct possibility.
With that committee I'm going with Fred McGriff as the most likely to be enshrined, followed by Murphy, then Mattingly.
I am surprised they used so many teammates on the committee. I see 3 sets.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
Next year they will vote on non-players only (I know, booooo!). The following year, the ballot will be made up of players who made their greatest contributions prior to 1980. And then this 3-year cycle will start again, unless the change up the voting eras yet again, which happens all the time. So, Parker would seem to have a bit of a wait before he can get nominated again. I do hope he gets in eventually.
I took a look at the voting committee (see below) for the players on the Contemporary Era ballot, and 2 things stuck out to me. One, McGriff and Murphy would both seem to have an excellent chance to get in with Maddux and Chipper Jones voting for them. I previously thought the Crime Dog had the best chance to get in. I think he's pretty close to a lock now.
Two, the steroid guys will have a tough time getting enough votes given that Sandberg and Frank Thomas, perhaps the 2 players most outspoken against PEDs, are on the committee. Any additional thoughts on the committee and who may be favored to get in based on those who comprise it? Committee members:
Chipper Jones, Greg Maddux, Jack Morris, Ryne Sandberg, Lee Smith, Frank Thomas, Alan Trammell, Paul Beeston, Theo Epstein, Arte Moreno, Kim Ng, Dave St. Peter, Ken Williams, Steve Hirdt, LaVelle Neal and Susan Slusser.
One other note - Greg Maddux is on record as saying that players who would have made the HOF without the help of PEDs (like Clemens and Bonds) should get in, and that those who were presumably only stars because of PEDs should not.
and that those who were presumably only stars because of PEDs should not.
Who would those players be?
Terry Bradshaw was AMAZING!!
Ignore list -Basebal21
Well, exactly. IMO, we can start with David Ortiz. Regardless what you think about Ortiz' election, it should be clear to absolutely everyone that he was not on a Hall of Fame trajectory at the end of his six years in Minnesota.
C'mon, guys who play defense worse than a man with no legs while hitting 20 homers or less are clearly what the HOF is all about.
>
>
What you say about Ortiz is undeniable.
There's A LOT more to it than that.
As a Twins fan and a fan of the Home Run, I saw Ortiz hit some absolute laser beam home runs. The guy had awesome power!
Twins coaches at the time we're trying to get ALL their hitters to draw walks and hit to the opposite field. Ridiculous! David was also injured a few times, and when in the lineup, seemed to be hitting either .400 or .200 (too often .200). I was hoping the Twins would keep him as their everyday 1B, but they decided to get rid of him.
His SLG was getting better his final 3 seasons and was a very nice .500 in his final year here.
Was he a cheater? I don't know, but he did have tremendous power when he was here. The idiots that tried to change the way he hit were a big part of the problem.
One other > @coolstanley said:
I don't know. You'd have to ask Greg.
Im never selling my Clemens 1985 Tiffany psa 8 auto 10!!!!! HE IS A HOF !!!!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Major_League_Baseball_players_from_Panama
To not elect Curt Schilling to the HOF is, to me, worse than electing borderline players like Baines or Kaat.
Schilling has the resume, both regular season and playoffs. He is being kept out due to unpopular personal views that have nothing at all to do with baseball.
Hopefully having players on the committee that played against Schilling will right this wrong.
The HOF loses more credibility for who's not there more so than who is.
Schilling definitely deserves to be in, but it's not because of his personal views (I'm sure there are plenty of current players and HOFers that have very similar views). Schilling has seemingly spent every waking minute doing everything he can to piss off everyone he comes in contact with. He's about as unlikable a personality as anyone in any walk of life.
That alone isn't that big of a deal, because there are plenty of unlikable guys in the HoF. It is a dubious strategy for induction to be a jerk to everyone you ever met though, including teammates and voters.
I've never viewed Schilling as unlikable.
Terry Bradshaw was AMAZING!!
Ignore list -Basebal21
The Vets Committee apparently thinks even less of Bonds and Clemens than the writers. Same goes for Schilling. Argue all you want but the lacks of votes speaks loud volumes
I did figure Mattingly and Murphy would garner more support but made only approx 40% or less of the ballots. Based on the low vote totals for all but McGriff I don't expect any of the rest to get in for the foreseeable future and not in this decade.
It's the singer not the song - Peter Townshend (1972)
I'm really glad the Crime Dog finally got in. That should have happened years ago. I wonder if Chipper Jones' absence hurt Dale Murphy's chances, though there's no way he would have swayed the voters enough to get Murph to 75%. Lastly, Curt Schilling absolutely belongs in the HOF based on his resume, but boy did he screw himself. All he had to do was keep his mouth shut after getting to 71% in his penultimate year on the regular ballot. Instead, he told the writers to go scratch because the veterans committee would vote him in instead. Didn't quite work out as he planned. I just hope he can zip it for the next few years so he can hopefully get in next time. Maybe show some humility. Something.
Congrats to McGriff but it's weird to have Gaylord Perry and David Ortiz in the Hall but not Clemens and Bonds.
He's not capable of that. If he was he would not be in the position in the first place. In fact I'd bet he doubles down on his mouthing off. My guess is he will be elected but not until after he leaves this mortal coil.
It's the singer not the song - Peter Townshend (1972)
Signed in person. Wish I had more good cards of McGriff. Always liked him and he’s definitely deserving.
Yaz Master Set
#1 Gino Cappelletti master set
#1 John Hannah master set
Also collecting Andre Tippett, Patriots Greats' RCs, Dwight Evans, 1964 Venezuelan Topps, 1974 Topps Red Sox
Yup. Makes no sense.
Does not bode well for Bonds or Clemens in the future based on them doing worse with the committee than they did with the writers.
Their only hope is a committee with different members, which is likely since these committees are comprised of different people all the time. Still, I think they're in for a (continued) long wait.
Well deserved, glad he made it.
Nic
Guides Authored - Graded Card Scanning Guide PDF | History of the PSA Label PDF
Someone's McGriff Leaf PSA 10 finished at $1237 last night in time with the HOF announcement. I'm curious to see if that was a peak spike or if they'll be higher over the coming week. No doubt the graded POP is going to increase a bit in the coming months. It has me tempted to rip a couple of my '86 Leaf boxes now.
I knew Schilling talked his way out of the Hall with the writers, but surprising the doghouse he finds himself in with other players. Needs to hire Blyleven to campaign for him.
Also surprised the committee wasn't swayed by all the "Clemens was clean" threads on this board.
They will probably do to Schilling to what they do in Football, and that's put him in when he is about 80. I was pissed when they waited so long to vote in long time Football GM Bobby Beathard. He clearly had already slipped mentally and if they had just voted him in 10 years earlier he could have really enjoyed it.
Successful card BST transactions with cbcnow, brogurt, gstarling, Bravesfan 007, and rajah 424.
The treatment Schilling is getting is awful. If he had made his personal views public during his playing days I could understand it a little better, but something that happens well after a clean, clearly HOF caliber career shouldn't be disqualifying.
Now Schilling knows how much the writers AND former players don't like him, because his stats are worthy. Some folks just can't get out of their own way.
i thought they were gonna choose more than 1 , lol
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Major_League_Baseball_players_from_Panama
i got this card about seven years ago. i am glad i have it now. if it not for the 94 strike season he would have hit over 500 home runs.
IMO, McGriff was about the fifth best 1B of his era not already enshrined. Hernandez was a little earlier, Giambi a little later. Palmeiro and McGwire have perceived PED problems, but why on earth put McGriff in before Will Clark and (especially) Olerud?
The committees should be disbanded and only meet every five years (ten would be better) to consider mostly people other than players. It makes no sense to put a Jack Morris in at the same time you deny the vastly superior Carlos Zambrano, Chris Carpenter, not to mention Johan Santana a second vote.
The hall of fame is a joke.
How come I never hear anyone mention Carlos Delgado?
He has been discussed in the past, but he put up some VERY nice seasons.
You are putting too much stock into the defensive numbers.
McGriff has 10,174 career plate appearances and a 134 OPS+. Run Expectancy in all 24 base/out situations 494 Runs
Olerud has 9,063 career plate appearances and a 129 OPS+. Run Expectancy in all 24 base/out situations 405 Runs
Will clark has 8,283 career plate appearances and a 137 OPS+. Run Expectancy in all 24 base/out situations 455 Runs
There isn't enough defensive value from the same position to close the offensive lead that McGriff has over them.
They played in basically the same era.
One could construct a case that they are similar, but there is zero case that can be made that either Clark or Olerud were clearly better.
As it stands now, McGriff clearly has them beat in offense.
Whatever figure that WAR comes up with to turn that table would only include numbers with about a five percent validity.
PS
Keith Hernandez 8,553 career plate appearances 128 OPS+. Run Expectancy 408. He doesn't measure up either.
Delgado has 8,657 career plate appearances and a 138 OPS+. Run Expectancy in all 24 base/out situations 480 Runs
Arod and Ortiz are also showcased in most major MLB broadcasts. The league and HOF are laughable with their hypocrisy and bias.
That said, congrats to McGriff.