For all you who think Rafael Palmerio does NOT deserve the HOF,

GoBravesGo

because he was just "pretty good" and stayed healthy and was consistant over a long career.....................................

tell me what you think about Cal Ripken's status as a future HOF? Did he not just have the same kind of career? He was just "Good" never the best in anything, except for most games played....................... so he got 3000 hits and is in the hall because he came to work every day without taking a sick day, right? seems like that is what you all are saying about Palmerio.

and what about Reggie Jackson? his career numbers are not that great - except for his HISTORY making mark of 2597 Career STRIKOUTS way more than anyone else in history!

Look at their stats - all over a 20/21 year career, look at GAMES PLAYED and AT BATS to see that Palmerio has done More in less chances than two Lesser players who are In the hall or will be (and have not been questioned that I have ever heard)


RIPKEN's stats

PALMERIO's stats

R. JACKSON's stats

yawie99

As the top player at his position for at least a decade, Ripken's Hall worthy, but I also think he's a little overrated.

KOBEcollector

Ripken made the All-Century team at his position. He was the A.L Rookie of the Year and won the MVP twice

Plus keep in mind that Ripken was a shortstop, a position that back when he played was not known for putting up the offensive #'s that we see today

GoBravesGo

so Ripken was more popular than Palmerio. (I mean the mvp is player voted - not based on actual stats. and all-century team was voted by sports writers, right?)

and I know that Reggie "Mr. October" Jackson was popular, but the fact is the numbers just do not show them as any better than Palmerio when you compare them side by side.

KOBEcollector

The MVP is voted by the Baseball Writers Association of America, not the players

If you ask me the Hall of fame is no longer for just greatest players ever to play the game . Their are many players in there right now that were never dominant players of their era . So if you go by those standards Palmerio should be voted in

Skinpinch

I figured it was obvious why Ripken is a lock. Dude, since he was a shortstop his value his waay higher than Palmeiro's. He wasn't annually the 7th best player at his position like Palmeiro. He was either one or two, sometimes three. He was also in the top three a few years in ALL OF BASEBALL as a player(a couple of years he was FIRST). I'm not sure where your getting your information where Ripken was never one of the best players in baseball. When Palmeiro is compared with ALL the players he was never even in the team photo as being near the best player in baseball. Guys like Jeter are easily better players, even though they have lesser offensive numbers, they are manning a much tougher position....a position where most players hit like garbage, so that gives their team a huge advantage. We already know there were about 7 other teams that had first baseman as good as Palmeiro on an annual basis, and often times more than that.



As for Reggie Jackson, I'm lost on your evaluationwhen you consider his annual rankings in his league as a hitter are 1,1,1,1,2,4,5,6,7,8,9,10.

GoBravesGO, you cannot compare Palmeiro and Reggie using their RAW NUMBERS!!! You must put them into context of the environmen it was accomplished! Winpitcher, Kobe, this is why I beat my head over this because there are still people who do not understnad that 38 Home Runs in 2001 does not means anywhere NEAR the same as 38 home runs in 1973. If one cannot understand this, then one should not be into discussions like this. They simply don't understand context, and that is where my frustration come from in those earlier threads.

There are reasons Palmeiro's numbers increased in the live ball era, EVERYBODY"S increased, just look across the board at the home run rates etc........forget it, I'm not explaining that again, you go back research the old posts and you can research it yourself.

By the way, based on millions of play by play analysis...strikeouts(opposed to non strikeout outs) cost a team .002 runs for every strike out. So that makes a minimal difference for Reggie. It counts, but not nearly enough to close that Grand Canyon gap between the two's ability.

Palmeiro was overshadowed in the NORMAL era he played in(his prime years by the way) AND the inflated era he palyed in. The only thing that changed was how his raw numbers looked(inflated), because the environemnt allowed it to...just like it allowed everyone else's too aslo.

GoBravesGO, you are in desperate need to research context and palyer analysis a lot more. You can check out a few books if you wish...it will add to your understanding of what is really taking, or has taken place.

Skinpinch

OPS+ for cross era analysis has some MAJOR FLAWS. It measures against the league average, and that has pitfalls as I've explained before. Measure it agains the top 20 players, those are the guys who would have been playing for sure in any era. That will give you an idea where the rank and file is. If you don't want to do the math, then just look where they ranked on a yearly basis, and that won't differe much at all from computing it all together.

OPS+ for in-era comparisons is a lot more valid. It still is missing a few things, but it gets the job done for this purpose.

As for Palmeiro, if he wasn't the 28th best hitter in the league soo often, and if he hit more of his homers with men on base, then maybe his teams would have beeen better....you think? Reggie was at the top of his league often, and he did hit a lot of his homers with men on base and that won more games for HIS teams....you think? Cal Ripken was the top of his position nearly every year, and in the top of the league very often as a player, and that sure won a lot of games for his teams...you think?

Axtell

Ripken is indeed a bit overrated, but as was stated earlier, he dominated his position for a decade, and being named MVP and all-century team is more than a popularity contest.

There is no comparing the two...Ripken is so far ahead of Raffy it's laughable. It's like comparing Raffy to McGwire because they have similar HR numbers (even though it took Raffy 4000+ more at bats to get there).