NEW HOFers Announced

spacktrack

It was just announced that Paul Molitor and Dennis Eckersley will be heading the new class of 2004 for induction into the Hall of Fame. Any thoughts on the selections or leave offs?

coachh

Not sure that Eck deserves it. I thought Molitor would go in by himself.

spacktrack

I had a feeling that Eck would get in. With something like 5 relievers on the ballot, I thought the voters would think that it was time for relievers to me more accepted in the HOF.

The percentages were as follows:

Player Votes %
Paul Molitor 431 85.2
Dennis Eckersley 421 83.2

Ryne Sandberg 309 61.1
Bruce Sutter 301 59.5
Jim Rice 276 54.5
Andre Dawson 253 50
"Goose" Gossage 206 40.7
Lee Smith 185 36.6
Bert Blyleven 179 35.4
Jack Morris 133 26.3
Steve Garvey 123 24.3
Tommy John 111 21.9
Alan Trammell 70 13.8
Don Mattingly 65 12.8
Dave Concepcion 57 11.3
Dave Parker 53 10.5
Dale Murphy 43 8.5
Keith Hernandez 22 4.3
Joe Carter 19 3.8
Fernando Valenzuela 19 3.8
Dennis Martinez 16 3.2
Dave Stieb 7 1.4
Jim Eisenreich 3 0
Jimmy Key 3 0
Doug Drabek 2 0
Kevin Mitchell 2 0
Juan Samuel 2 0
Cecil Fielder 1 0
Randy Myers 1 0
Terry Pendleton 1 0
Danny Darwin 0 0
Bob Tewksbury 0 0

dbj77

not a very impressive class all around..........

helionaut

There have been numerous threads, not to mention hundreds of articles, on the bona fides of various people. I'm a little surprised that it was only these two, but it seems like HOF voters get taken to task when they elect someone without "living legend" prestige or elite stats. And that's not even counting the guys the Vet Committee elected in the past decade or so. I guess they played it safe, or else there were enough guys who were similar to each other without standing out. Sutter/Gossage/Smith, Blyleven/John/Morris, Dawson/Rice/Carter/Parker/Murphy, all split each others' vote, I think. Sandberg is the only power-hitting second baseman in the group, so it's just a matter of what you think the impact of his years off and non-impact return are. I think he'll get in eventually. I wouldn't have thought Eckersley was a HOFer, as his starting career was decent at best and I've never been overly impressed by the "closer" role, but taken as a whole, he's got a nice body of work. It's the writers who are overwhelmed by the "save" stat and the "closer mentality," but it's built-in drama for the announcers and journos to hang a story on, and they get to vote, so fine.

megatron

Bert Blyleven and Ryne Sandberg just can't get any respect

Cubfan

At least Sandberg made a good jump from the 40 to the 60 percentile. Maybe next year.

40ozman

The vote often shock me. Who the hell votes for Terry Pendleton, Juan Samuel, Cecil Fielder, and Kevin Mitchell???? I Know sports writers can be jackasses, but come on. Don't get me wrong, all these player were good players, and ones that will be remembered by most of of us. I just can't believe that a player that plays single a independant league ball, well after his prime (Mitchell), probably isn't good enough to be in the hall of fame.

megatron

So now, the only absolute entry next year will be Wade Boggs.

NickM

Here are the 2002 totals for candidates who got at least 5% but were not elected:

Jim Rice 260 55.08
Bruce Sutter 238 50.42
Andre Dawson 214 45.34
Goose Gossage 203 43.01
Steve Garvey 134 28.39
Tommy John 127 26.91
Bert Blyleven 124 26.27
Jim Kaat 109 23.09
Jack Morris 97 20.55
Don Mattingly 96 20.34
Luis Tiant + 85 18.01
Alan Trammell 74 15.68
Dale Murphy 70 14.83
Dave Parker 66 13.98
Dave Concepcion 56 11.86
Keith Hernandez 29 6.14


Here are the 2003 totals for candidates who got at least 5% of the vote but were not elected:

Bruce Sutter 266 53.63
Jim Rice 259 52.21
Andre Dawson 248 50.00
Ryne Sandberg 244 49.19
Lee Smith 210 42.34
Rich Gossage 209 42.14
Bert Blyleven 145 29.23
Steve Garvey 138 27.82
Jim Kaat + 130 26.21
Tommy John 116 23.39
Jack Morris 113 22.78
Alan Trammell 70 14.11
Don Mattingly 68 13.71
Dale Murphy 58 11.69
Dave Concepcion 55 11.09
Dave Parker 51 10.28
Fernando Valenzuela 31 6.25
Keith Hernandez 30 6.05


Sandberg rose dramatically, and is almost a sure bet now for eventual selection. Sutter's rise has to be encouraging for his supporters. Rice and Dawson are standing still (not a very encouraging sign for future election), but are likely Veterans' Committee picks. Blyleven is rising, but will probably have to wait for the Veterans' Committee. I don't see anyone else from this list getting chosen for the Hall by the BBWAA, although several may be chosen by the Veterans' Committee.

aro13

NickM - I do not have the numbers in front of me but I would guess that anybody that received over 50% of the vote has eventually gotten into the Hall of Fame one way or another.

NickM

aro - Gil Hodges reached 50% on 11 occasions, 3 times breaking 60%. The only other players to have ever reached 50% and not currently be members are Sutter, Dawson, Rice, and Sandberg.

Nick

aro13

NickM - Thanks for the numbers. I probably should have added that under the old system it was likely a player would eventually get in but with the new veteran committee system it might not be as easy.

Skycap

Nick,

Gil Hodges truly deserves to be in the Hall of Fame.

How many first basemen – or players at other positions for that matter – accomplished anything equivalent to the following by the end of Hodges’ playing era:

· All-time career right-handed home run hitter in their league
· All-time career Grand Slam hitter in their league
· Had 100 or more RBI for seven consecutive years
· Had 30 or more HR six times, five consecutively
· Won three Gold Gloves (first three awarded; they started giving them in 1957, toward end of his career)
· Seven World Series appearances

Hodges was a dominating first baseman in his era – both offensively and defensively – and one of the best in baseball history. This is a compelling case for election into the Hall of Fame.

Skycap

curmudgeon

Skycap-- I don't disagree, and would be glad to see Gil make it. What's the argument(s) against this guy--hung on too long, overall numbers not good enough, what?

pandrews

i say good for both of em.. Ive always like molitor... and Oaklands my favorite team.. so of course I dig Eck.

rickster

The problem Gil Hodges has is that 6 of his Dodger teammates (Campanella, Robinson, Snider, Reese, Koufax, and Drysdale), plus Alston, are already in the Hall. The old 15 member Veteran’s Committee was reluctant to add another Dodger. The old committee was very political (you vote for my candidate, I’ll vote for yours). Hodges has a better chance of getting in next year since the voting for veterans has been altered to include more voters, but last year (the first one with the new system) no veteran got enough votes to get in the Hall.

No question he should be in there.

Skycap

Rick,

Hodges got 50 votes from the new veteran's committee in February 2003 but needed 61 (75% of the 81 voters). Nobody got elected by the committee last year, although he was the top vote getter. They only meet every other year, so we have to wait until February 2005 for the next vote.

I don't think it's a problem that six of his teammates are already in. His accomplishments stand on their own. Even so, I consider two of the players you mentioned -- Koufax and Drysdale -- to have been mainly Los Angeles Dodgers while Hodges was primarily a Brooklyn Dodger.

Skycap

jackstraw

Jim Rice is a HOF er and not a slider or soft! the guy was dominate in the dead ball era and played half of his career games at fenway park! i know it doesn't count for anything but he was a line drive type hitter! you put him at yankee stadium for half of his career games and he has 500 or very close!!! these types of argumants never sway anybody's vote so i will shut up about rice.
eck's claim to fame is that he has the most wins + saves = career total. i believe it's in the 500's but someone may come up with the exact figure. thats pretty impressive and not many pitchers can make that transformation from starter to reliever. i can think of lets see?
smoltz, jeff weaver(LMAO) and nobody else comes to mind.

DeutscherGeist

I knew Molitor would get elected just because of the 3000 hits.

Eck I was not sure of, but since he brought about innovation in baseball (the 1 inning specialist), he certainly had a shot. He was a good starter, but not great. He was a dominant closer for 4 years 1988-1992, but I thought the voters would say that's not enough.

I thought Sandberg would get in, but his case is only a matter of time. I really do see him get in.

Keith Hernandez is dropped off the list---thought he would stay on for the 15 years.

Cecil Fielder---I thought he would get more votes (at least enough to stay on). I mean he finished second behind Henderson, Ripken and Eck (?) three consecutive years....He was a feared homerun hitter. Oh well, I guess Albert Belle will face the same fate when he becomes eligible.

Trammell---I thought he was one of the all-time best short stops. Everybody was touting him. I thought he would get in easily, but he faces elimination. Well, maybe he was not better than Barry Larkin or Cal Ripken and is simply not good enough to be enshrined.


Next year, Wade Boggs will get in. I wonder what his ranking is in all-time batting averages with a minimum of 10,000 AB. He was ranked 5th at one point when he had around 10 years behind him. His 5 batting titles and 7 consecutive seasons of more than 200 hits is outstanding. He is a real HOFer!!!

vikesfan40

The voters continue to show their ignorrance by not voting in Sandberg.

CW

Some of you guys are mentioning Gil Hodges. What about somebody
who's already in -- Ralph Kiner. He was a six time all-star, and
he led the league in HR's for seven years in his short, 10 year career.
Is he really HOF caliber?

jackstraw

ralph kiner is in the HOF?

jackstraw

i guess he is , yikes and sorry.

rickster

<< <i>I don't think it's a problem that six of his teammates are already in. His accomplishments stand on their own. Even so, I consider two of the players you mentioned -- Koufax and Drysdale -- to have been mainly Los Angeles Dodgers while Hodges was primarily a Brooklyn Dodger. >>



I agree it shouldn't be a problem, but it was a problem for certain members of the old Veteran's Committee. Even leaving out Koufax and Drysdale, they saw 4 Brooklyn Dodgers enter the Hall, and thought that was enough. They were running the committee like their private club, basically unaccountable to anyone, which is why the Hall of Fame disbanded it, and created a larger voting group where the voting results are disclosed. I think last year many of these new voters were afraid too many guys would get in, so they withheld votes, and no one made it. In 2005, maybe we will see more entrants, including Hodges and Ron Santo.

roastedcat

Thats pretty cool, just went on ebay and purchased both Paul Molitor & Dennis Erkersley Autograph cards for under $20. each for my set.
It's best to buy them now while they are still dirt cheap! I don't wish to pay $40. & up for them later.


Jery

DeutscherGeist

Aren't Moltior and Eck stuff already on the rise in prices? I mean, now would be a terrible time to buy, but a perfect time to sell. The announcement has been made, now watch ebay.

JrMacdaddy

Kiner played 8 fewer seasons than Hodges and ended up with 1 less HR and 259 RBI's.

I don't know if Hodges was a dominant player.

I would classify a player that leads the league in HR his first 7 seasons as a dominant player.

I don't think anyone would argue Sandy Koufax shouldn't be in the Hall of Fame but if you look at his career he had one good year, one very good year and 4 dominant years.

CW

JrMacdaddy said:

> I don't think anyone would argue Sandy Koufax shouldn't be in the
> Hall of Fame but if you look at his career he had one good year, one
> very good year and 4 dominant years.

Yep, that's a good comparison. Both Kiner & Koufax had their careers
cut short due to injury. No denying that Kiner could hit homers --
his numbers would be impressive even by today's standards. However,
I always thought it took a little more than just being able to lead the league
in homers if you were going to make it into the Hall.

aro13

curmudgeon - Hodges is not in the Hall for a few reasons I would suspect.
1) Other than sacrifice flies and games played he never led the league in any one season category (unless you count strikeouts) during his career.
2) On any of Bill James measuring sticks for Hall of Famers he does not rank at or close to the AVERAGE Hall of Famer.
3) Of his ten most comparable players (statistically speaking) for career statistics not one is even close to a Hall of Famer. His most comparable player is Norm Cash who almost mirrors his career statistics. Nobody it seems is campaigning for Norm Cash.
Also the fact that he played an offensive position has probably hurt his chances. The career numbers seem to outweigh the sentimental benefit of managing the Miracle Mets.

As for Ralph Kiner he was an offensive force. His career OBP was .398 and career slugging of .548. Those are huge numbers. He had an OPS of over 1.00 three times in his career. That is also huge. The fact that he played on a team without any other prolific offensive performers makes his numbers look even better. You could argue his career was not long enough to warrant Hall of Fame consideration but it is very doubtful you will find a player that led the league for homers 7 years in a row, and with his career OBP and SLG that is not a lock Hall of Famer.

DeutscherGeist

This question whether a player dominated or not is appearing to be very subjective. Why were the four years Koufax had dominant? Did he lead in strikeouts, ERA, wins, winning percentage every single year? A few of them every year? What constitutes dominance? This is important to know because the fact he was so dominant for 4 years is what got Koufax in.

Gil Hodges does not fair well on the black ink or gray ink test, therefore I doubt whether he was considered to be the best baseball player for a significant stretch. Did hodges dominate? Without fairing well on the black ink test, what other factors are there to prove his dominance besides a bunch of passionate fans?

fullerfun4

I think both are good selections. Molitor is #8 in total hits and Eck has almost 200 wins and 380 saves. That's a great career.

DeutscherGeist

Gil Hodges was a very good player, no doubt, but he does not stand out as one of the greats. Where are the arguments that he belongs as one of the all-time greats. I am willing to listen.

He was great defensively, but does he crack the Mattingly and Hernandez barrier?

Why did he not lead in home runs or RBI's ever, or any other serious offensive category if he is indeed one of the best. He had 20 years in MLB, yet below 2000 hits and below 400 homers (granted it might have been a dead ball era and I totally understand).

He was never in the top 5 MVP voting and since you guys say that first baseman are the big boppers and big hitters, he should have at least cracked the top 5 once. I mean, he didn't play Ozzie Smith's position where you can excuse being below average in hitting. Maybe Hodges had to contend with 4 guys that are also the all-time greats, so that is why he never stood out, and I can totally sympathize with that if that is the case. Which HOFers did play in his era? Williams?....

Hodges fits the mold of the traditional first baseman that happens to have good defense. He hit .270, a ton of homers, and struck out a lot. Mark McGwire was similar, but he actually won a few HR titles and broke a lot of single season MLB records. McGwire, I think, would top Hodges.

Mattingly ranks a lot higher than Hodges in the black ink test and a little bit higher in the gray ink. The gray ink suppose to favor longer careers. Mattingly ranks in the top 100 in the Hall Monitor, while Hodges is not even close.

I am not saying Hodges does not belong in the Hall of Fame, but as I have shown, there are good arguments against him. I am not an expert on Hodges, so if there are good arguments for his induction, please tell me and educate me. I am here to learn. I think you guys can show me how Hodges does distinguish himself from the rest, so go ahead and post.

rickster

It really helps to evaluate players based upon the era they played in. And on a dominate team, their teammates. The Brooklyn Dodgers won five pennants between 1949-1957, and had HOF players such as Robinson (MVP 1949), Campanella (MVP 1951,1953,1955), Snider, and Reese, plus Carl Furillo. However, Hodges was the key RBI guy year in and year out, leading the team in RBI’s 4 times in this span, second 3 times, and third 2 times. People get enamored with home runs, however I’ve always felt the key to the game has been to knock runs in, and Hodges excelled at that. In fact, during the 50’s (Hodges main player years as a starter), I believe only Snider (1031) drove in more runs than Hodges (1001), and that includes Hall-of-Famers Mantle (957 from 1951-1960, I added 1960 to include 10 years), Mays (812 from 1951-1960, I added 1960 to include 10 years), Musial (978), and Berra (997).

Regarding fielding, he only won three Gold Gloves, but they didn’t start giving out the award until 1957, toward the end of his career. Players from his era describe him as either the best fielder, or one of the best, they ever saw at first base.

Then add his success as a Manager.

I’m sure others will chime in with their own reasoning on this.

When I have a chance, I will put together an argument for another forgotten player for the Hall of Fame - Maury Wills.

rickster

Regarding Hodges and his RBI's, forgot to mention that his most important RBI's came in game 7 of the 1955 World Series, when he knocked in both runs in a 2-0 win, bringing Brooklyn its only championship.

Rick

NickM

Deutcher - here's what Koufax did from 1963 through 1966 - led every year in ERA (plus 1962), led 3 of the 4 years in wins - and was 4th the other time, led in won-lost percentage twice - and was 2nd and 3rd the other 2 years, led 3 of the 4 years (plus 1962) in both fewest hits per 9 innings and fewest walks plus hits per 9 innings - and was 2nd the other year, led 3 of the 4 years in K's - and was 4th the other year, led 3 of the 4 years in shutouts - and was 2nd the other year, won the Cy Young Award 3 of the 4 years (and finished 3rd the other year) when there was only 1 award given for both leagues, and won 1 MVP Award and finished 2nd twice. 3 times he won what is known as the pitching triple crown - leading the league in wins, ERA, and K's.

That's dominant.

Nick