Is Rickey Henderson a First Ballot Hall of Famer?
RickyHendersonSD
Posts: 327
in Sports Talk
I say he is and it will be unanimous.
0
Comments
Edited to clarify...
Definitely yes that he's a first ballot HOFer, although I doubt it will be unanimous. We have to remember that NO ONE has EVER been elected unanimously! I'm not saying it shouldn't be unanimous, because it should be. I'm just saying that there's always someone who won't vote for the player.
Steve
The highest i think is Seaver?
I see Henderson below Seaver's number.
Steve D
<< <i>Absolutely - I don't think anyone would dispute his first ballot status... >>
Well Ct. he was on the yankess.......
Actually i think he is in an independant lg anyway.
I would think that he would have to be in the majors for the clock to start again.
Not sure though especially if he is under contract with a Maj lg team.
SD
<< <i>Not sure if that hurts his time Coin.
Actually i think he is in an independant lg anyway.
I would think that he would have to be in the majors for the clock to start again.
Not sure though especially if he is under contract with a Maj lg team.
SD >>
I heard on the NY and Bos sports talk shows that any pro play delays start of the 5 year wait. I never researched it so it may not be accurate. Personally, I don't think his independent league play should delay his HOF induction at all.
Yes, I collect shiny modern crap
All your Shaq are belong to me
<< <i>I say he is and it will be unanimous. >>
Rickey who?
rbd
p.s. ya! (edit: Rickey could most likely, put on a uniform, and play well in "the bigs" today! At age, omg! what! Never mind! LOL!)
Quicksilver Messenger Service - Smokestack Lightning (Live) 1968
Quicksilver Messenger Service - The Hat (Live) 1971
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
looking for the following,
Thurman Munson PSA 8 or above
Ron Guidry PSA 9 or above
Paul O'Neill PSA 9 or above
-- Yogi Berra
good to know that.
how about those independant leagues? Northern etc?
Steve
Ricky says that Ricky had a very good career and Ricky could steal a base or two.
The question is what hat will he wear into the hall.
some 2 and 3 times
Steve
dgf
-- Yogi Berra
dgf
To say that with Lou Brock standing next to him told me all I ever needed to know about the man. Great ballplayer, but I don't give a damn.
From the HOF:
Player shall have ceased to be an active player in the Major Leagues at least five (5) calendar years preceding the election but may be otherwise connected with baseball.
So I am not sure that is in fact the case.
Steve
Read the link I provided. Don't judge a man's entire worth by one quote taken out of context or a poorly phrased idea. Personally, I have no problem with Henderson saying what he is "the greatest..." etc, but that's not really the way that was intended to come out. Have you ever heard the whole speech? My guess is "no". Read up and don't be so quick to judge a guy on one sentence. Of course, I wouldn't want facts to cloud the issue of a good hatred. What fun would that be?
dgf
Steve
And he said it with Lou Brock standing next to him? Good for him.
<< <i>dallas,
Read the link I provided. Don't judge a man's entire worth by one quote taken out of context or a poorly phrased idea. Personally, I have no problem with Henderson saying what he is "the greatest..." etc, but that's not really the way that was intended to come out. Have you ever heard the whole speech? My guess is "no". Read up and don't be so quick to judge a guy on one sentence. Of course, I wouldn't want facts to cloud the issue of a good hatred. What fun would that be?
dgf >>
I remember watching SportsCenter or something similar the night the record had been broken, mostly to see Lou Brock - one of my all-time favorites - and hear what he had said. And as I recall he made a very gracious speech. The only thing I remember for certain years later was my jaw hitting the floor when Rickey made his "out with yesterday's garbage, now worship me" comment - or words to similar effect. That, and the expression on Brock's face as he was announced as yesterday's garbage. My mother called me from St. Louis the next day for the sole purpose of finding out if I had heard what Henderson had said - it was the talk of the town among fans and non-fans alike. It would be interesting to know what percentage of St. Louisans still refer to Henderson as "that a$$hole", but I can tell you it approached 99% for quite a while after that speech - and remains steady at 100% in my family.
As you have already figured out, I have a good hatred of Henderson built up, and I can't imagine what facts there could be that would soften it. It seems to me that it would never have occurred to a person with even the tiniest bit of class to say what he said, or at the very least he would have fallen over himself to kiss Brock's ass immediately after the words "slipped" out if they were unintended. That he is able to hide that lack of class some of the time may be true, but, again, I already know all I need to know about the man.
Including, of course, that he is a first ballot HOFer; I just won't be watching the ceremony.
<< <i> The only thing I remember for certain years later was my jaw hitting the floor when Rickey made his "out with yesterday's garbage, now worship me" comment - or words to similar effect. >>
He said nothing of the sort...quit embellishing what was really said.
"It took a long time, huh? (Pause for cheers). First of all, I would like to thank God for giving me the opportunity. I want to thank the Haas family, the Oakland organization, the city of Oakland, and all you beautiful fans for supporting me. (Pauses for cheers). Most of all, I'd like to thank my mom, my friends, and loved ones for their support. I want to give my appreciation to Tom Trebelhorn and the late Billy Martin. Billy Martin was a great manager. He was a great friend to me. I love you, Billy. I wish you were here. (Pauses for cheers). Lou Brock was the symbol of great base stealing. But today, I'm the greatest of all time. Thank you."
Rickey's never been involved in anything resembling a scandal off the field, yet most people find fault with the man. He's among the greatest to every play this game we call baseball - we should be celebrating his career, not judging him on one out of context quote.
Why is ok for Muhammed Ali to say he was the greatest of all time, but for Rickey to say it it's somehow heresy?
Jealousy?
dgf >>
I remember watching SportsCenter or something similar the night the record had been broken, mostly to see Lou Brock - one of my all-time favorites - and hear what he had said. And as I recall he made a very gracious speech. The only thing I remember for certain years later was my jaw hitting the floor when Rickey made his "out with yesterday's garbage, now worship me" comment - or words to similar effect. That, and the expression on Brock's face as he was announced as yesterday's garbage. My mother called me from St. Louis the next day for the sole purpose of finding out if I had heard what Henderson had said - it was the talk of the town among fans and non-fans alike. It would be interesting to know what percentage of St. Louisans still refer to Henderson as "that a$$hole", but I can tell you it approached 99% for quite a while after that speech - and remains steady at 100% in my family.
Rickey henderson absolutely did not say that " out with yesterdays garbage " nonsense you are saying he did. Nor did Brocks " jaw drop" from any comment made. It is amazing how dislike for a person can escalate over years into believing something that just did not happen.
-- Yogi Berra
He dominated the game in a way that we will likely never see again. He never gave in to the notion that he needed to hit home runs to get the big payday that so many of these players nowadays do. The only player I can see resembling his lack of desire for HRs and getting on base is Ichiro, though Ichiro doesn't walk with nearly the effectiveness that Henderson did. Henderson was the epitome of the leadoff batter, and in his prime, I suspect every team would have welcomed him into their folds.
All this talk about his arrogance is simply that - talk. It's not trash talking when you can back up the words with your game. He did that, did it for 25 years, and IS among the greatest to EVER play this game.
<< <i>Rickey henderson absolutely did not say that " out with yesterdays garbage " nonsense you are saying he did. Nor did Brocks " jaw drop" from any comment made. It is amazing how dislike for a person can escalate over years into believing something that just did not happen. >>
The quote of Henderson is what's known as a paraphrase and was intended to convey my emotions regarding his comments in an ironic fashion.
In the same sentence, the phrase "jaw hitting the floor" is prefaced by the word "my", a possessive pronoun conveying that the jaw that dropped belonged to me, not to Mr. Brock.
Your final sentence is an example of circular reasoning, since it was this incident that began my dislike of Henderson.
I hope this helps.
it's obvious 'your' dislike is based on 'your' hero being ousted as the all time stolen base leader by someone who was superior in every possible way, yet you cannot fathom someone is better, so you make up these ridiculous stories in order to make yourself feel that Henderson is the devil.
It is people like you with selective amnesia who have continued these ridiculous assertions that Henderson is someone that was arrogant - when all he was was simply the best at what he did.
Grow up already.
You start every other damn sentence with " I remember blah blah....or something similar " Well, which is it ? Do you remember ? Or is what you have something " similar " to a memory ?
And my last sentence was far from circular reasoning. I do not believe for one moment that you were a Henderson fan before the speech, and him breaking your idols record just aided your dislike for him. I think your memory, or something similar, is skewed, and in the end causing you to make up speeches that never happened.
-- Yogi Berra
<< <i>It is people like you with selective amnesia who have continued these ridiculous assertions that Henderson is someone that was arrogant - when all he was was simply the best at what he did.
>>
Henderson was arrogant AND he was the best at what he did. More to the point, he was better than Brock - you know it, I know it, Henderson knows it and Brock knows it. What separates people with class from people like Henderson is that they don't say it out loud in front of Brock and a worldwide audience.
And OK, I'll bite, what is it that "people like [me] with selective amnesia" have forgotten? Or are you using words without knowing their meanings again?
<< <i>Actually Dallas, it didnt help at all. I could care less about your lesson on the english language. WHAT you were attempting to do is provide innacurate details of a speech. Spin doctor your words now all you want, just like you did Hendersons, but the fact remains he said nothing " similar to the effect " of out with yesterdays garbage as you claimed. There is a world of difference between a man paying respect to the FORMER stolen base champ. then proclaiming himself the greatest....after all, wasnt he ?? I doubt Brock took any offense to then comment, he understood the manner in which it was said.
You start every other damn sentence with " I remember blah blah....or something similar " Well, which is it ? Do you remember ? Or is what you have something " similar " to a memory ?
And my last sentence was far from circular reasoning. I do not believe for one moment that you were a Henderson fan before the speech, and him breaking your idols record just aided your dislike for him. I think your memory, or something similar, is skewed, and in the end causing you to make up speeches that never happened. >>
I'm sorry that it didn't help, but maybe it did and you just don't realize it yet.
In any event, I, and several million others in and from the St. Louis area, did not care for Henderson's remarks when he made them. If you hear respect in his words, then I will never change your mind. I do not, I hear quite the opposite, and we'll just have to leave it at that. Neither of us will ever know for sure.
When you doubt that Brock took offense at Henderson's words, you are mistaken. He was very diplomatic about it when asked (and he was asked about it many times - this was a BIG story in St. Louis), but his displeasure with Henderson was obvious.
Since you don't seem to understand "paraphrase" or "irony", I will have to let go any explanation regarding my "memory".
IF I hated Henderson before this event, then your reasoning is not circular. In that case, you are begging the question - I'd hotspot that so you knew what it meant, but you don't seem to appreciate that. The truth is, you are again mistaken - I did not like or dislike Henderson before this happened. If you would prefer to believe that I am lying about that, that is your right, but then there really isn't anything worth discussing.
Hope this helps.
<< <i>
And OK, I'll bite, what is it that "people like [me] with selective amnesia" have forgotten? Or are you using words without knowing their meanings again? >>
Do I need to use hyperlinks to dictionary.com to be as witty as you? That was oh so clever of you.
Selective amnesia is YOU remembering only the 'Lou Brock was the symbol of greatness...today I am the greatest' and forgetting the rest of his gracious speech, and spouting off something inane like 'out with yesterdays junk now idolize me'.
<< <i>
<< <i>
And OK, I'll bite, what is it that "people like [me] with selective amnesia" have forgotten? Or are you using words without knowing their meanings again? >>
Do I need to use hyperlinks to dictionary.com to be as witty as you? That was oh so clever of you.
Selective amnesia is YOU remembering only the 'Lou Brock was the symbol of greatness...today I am the greatest' and forgetting the rest of his gracious speech, and spouting off something inane like 'out with yesterdays junk now idolize me'. >>
Oh, OK, the problem is that you haven't understood a word I've said, not the "selective amnesia" part.
My bad.
Now, and since my memory comes and goes please explain this to me quickly (using hyperlinks where appropriate), why exactly is the rest of his speech supposed to change my opinion of what he said about Brock?
And ohh, for the record, I fully understand both paraphrase and irony, but like you with henderson, I could now give a damn what you ever have to say again.
---
-- Yogi Berra
Let's recap what happened here (unrelated posts omitted):
0. Before my first post: you posted twice, dgf posted once, then dgf posted a link to the quote that always ticks me off
1. I quoted the one line from the speech that made me forever dislike Henderson
2. dgf repsonded to my post
3. I responded to dgf's post with some elaboration (this is the post that contained the paraphrase and the irony)
4. You made a post that (1st sentence) rebuked me for quoting Henderson incorrectly when I had clearly not quoted him at all, (2nd sentence) misquoted what I said so that you could again say that I was wrong, and then (3rd sentence) made a statement which was flatly untrue about my motivations. Three sentences, all of them insulting, all directed at me, all wrong, and all of them completely uncalled for since, as you so correctly observed, we don't know each other and I had never posted anything directed at you.
5. I responded to your post with more than a little sarcasm. I thought, and still think, you had it coming. You could have posted 'til kingdom come without drawing a reply from me, but you chose to take a few jabs instead. You have a right to do so, of course, but you had to know (or certainly should have known) a jab was coming back.
6. You replied to my post. The first half I honestly still don't follow, uness I assume that you don't know what "paraphrase" means. I believe you when you say that you do, but then I can't make heads or tails of it. In the second half of your post, you call me a liar because I am claiming I didn't dislike Henderson before this incident and somehow you just know that I did. Since you are clearly sensitive about what I say to you without knowing you, this part of your post is especially ironic.
7. I replied to your post, simply to clear up the mess you had made in speaking for me and I just can't stand for the last word on what I said to be left to someone else when they've gotten it wrong. I took a few more jabs since you had now called me a liar, but they were soft ones and I was essentially done at this point.
8. You made another post, the purpose of which - as best I can determine - was to insult me and to point out how wrong you think it is for people to post insults when the poster doesn't know the postee.
So, we had a little message board dust-up. I re-read every single post in it and I can not see how a reasonable person could say that you were not the one who drew first blood. My reply may or may not have escalated things more than it should have - that would be a matter of opinion - but that's the kind of thing that happens when you take shots at people you don't know and who weren't talking to you.
Axtell, this quote just doesn't make sense.
<< <i>The only player I can see resembling his lack of desire for HRs and getting on base is Ichiro, though Ichiro doesn't walk with nearly the effectiveness that Henderson did. Henderson was the epitome of the leadoff batter, and in his prime, I suspect every team would have welcomed him into their folds. >>
Resembling somebody's lack of desire for hitting home runs? Baseball fans, this needs to be cleared up as I hear it all too often..."Home Runs are overrated blah blah blah." A home run isn't overrated, it has a pretty specific run value, just as a BB, 1b, 2b, 3b, and OUT MADE has a specific run value, or negative run value in the case of an out made. A home run isn't overrated. The average home run leads to about 1.4 runs historically. The average single leads to about .47 runs historically. The average walk .33. They are what they are.
I believe what these people(HR bashers) are TRYING to say, or what they should be trying to say is something like, "The benefit of the few extra home runs he is adding to his stat totals, from his singular pursuit of that event, is not equaling the cost of his now decling other offensive events as a result of that singular Home Run pursuit."
Yeah, if the desire for home runs means your OB% and SLG% will fall below league average, then the home run is overrated. But if you can hit the home runs AND KEEP THE HIGH OB% AND SLG% than it isn't overrated in the least.
Basically, just don't measure the value of a guy using home runs as the sole measurements. Just like you don't measure a guy using BA or worse yet, total hits as the sole measurement. Use the measurements that depict the accurate and true value of EACH offensive event, then you avoid bias type analysis, and you come much closer to the side of reality.
In caveman analysis, Henderson did have 297 Home Runs, and that seems like an awful lot for a guy trying to "avoid" them.
I agree with you. The HR is absolutely NOT overrated. It's huge! Nothing I'd like more on my club than a bunch of guys who are possabilities every time they're in there. The issue I have with them as a coach is their lack of frequency, coupled with the ease with which they can be eliminated from my offense for factors outside our control (weather, sinking fastballs, etc.). Given the realistic expectation that my club will hit as many HR as singles, I would take the HR. That said, you simply cannot build your offennse AROUND the HR. You just can't. You can build an offense around a player like Henderson. Now, it's true that singles, doubles, etc. can also be curtailed somewhat by the same factors I mention, but not with the absolute frequency and impact.
I tell my clubs every spring, "A good offense is one that can score when guys are NOT hitting. Anyone can score when you're all locked in."
To me, Henderson is the epitome of the type of player who has value hitting .230 with little or no power.
That does not mean that I feel Albert Pujols is overrated. Kingman, perhaps...not Pujols.
dgf
I didn't say HRs were overrated. I simply said that Henderson (and Ichiro currently) understand they are more valuable getting on base and setting the table than trying to hit HRs (something neither are particularly well suited to doing). And yes, you can avoid hitting home runs by (a) not bulking up and getting stronger, instead remaining lean and more of a contact hitter, (b) hitting for contact instead of for home runs, and (c) working pitch counts deeper, taking a pitch 3-0 that would be ball 4 instead of trying to hit out.
As far as Henderson hitting 297 home runs, let's not forget how many games he played in (he's 4th all time) and at bats (10th). He had a whole hell of a lot of opportunity to hit those home runs.
Little league coaches want the kids to put the bat on the ball, for any batted ball may turn into an adventure. In the lower levels, the home run isn't worth as much as in MLB. Why? A single in little league has great potential to be a run anyway. A lead off HR in little league is an automatic run. A lead off single in little league has a high percentage of being a run as well. It isn't worth the trouble of striking out more often in little league just to add a few extra home runs, because contact plays a vital role at that level, and a baserunner has a high percentage of scoring anyway. AND THIS IS WHERE THE MAJORITY OF BASEBALL FANS INFER THAT KNOWLEDGE AND TRANSPOSE IT WHEN EVALUATING THE MLB GAME!!!! THIS IS WHERE THE ERRORS OCCUR AND MISCONCEPTIONS!
A single in MLB has nowhere near that same potential to be a run. Based on the MLB play by play evidence we know what 1b's are TYPICALLY worth and what HR's are TYPICALLY worth. .47 runs and 1.40 runs. Swinging the bat just to make contact has very little importance in MLB!! All that means is that you are going to make a lot of ground outs and pop outs instead of strike outs becasue the defense is so darn good! So, it is very worth it in MLB to sacrifice strikeouts if it is going to mean extra base hits because that is where the runs are scored.
WE KNOW, BASED ON MILLIONS OF PLAY BY PLAY EVIDENCE, that a strikeout is worth only about -.03 as opposed to a contact out. That evidence is virtually indidisputible. I challenge anyone to scour the play by play and come up wtih anythig significantly different. The only difference you will get is if somebody somehow reserved all their strikeouts with a man on third and less than two outs, but that doesn't happen.
Men on base events will change the average worth of all offesnive events, but most players fall within the average realm. But again, those value can be looked at very easily too.
Ax, a player can avoid home runs for the reasons you gave, but if a player CAN MAINTAIN HIS OB% SKILLS AND HIT THE HOME RUNS THEN THAT PLAYER IS FAR SUPRIOR! If a player was capable of hitting more HR's while still being able to maintain is OB% skills, he would be doing it. If he isn't, he is either:
A. Not capable of doing it, and he is saying that he can just to make it look like he is better than he actually is, or
B. He is a moron. Even though he was blessed with the abilities to play the game, it doesn't mean he was blessed with a brain that works to that same level, and it doens't mean his analytical abilities are anywhere near on the button.
The bottom line DGF about a good offense. The best offenses are the ones that comprise these three things 1. The ability to get on base(OB%). 2. The ability to efficiently move runners to home plate(SLG%), and 3. Timely hitting (MEN ON HITTING). This element has a luck factor too.
Notes... a sacrifice bunt is NOT efficiently moving a runner towards home.
Stolen bases are another component, as is taking the extra base while on base already. Stolen bases are of great value. However, the negative value of a caught stealing is equal to that of the positive value of a single stolen base. A guy with 20 SB, and 10 CS is basically spinning his wheels. OBVIOUSLY IF HE is saving all his successful stolen bases in the most meaningful situations, and getting caught when it doesnt' matter, then that number changes. BUt that doesn't happen!!
Henderson does have value as a .230 hitter because he maintained a decent OB% despite that average, and a SLG% somewhere near average. Add his stolen base skills, then he has value. Other players can equal that value but in different forms. Regardless of the route, if the value is the same, then it is the same. By the way, I can counteract SB guys too. I can get a good catcher for one. I can teach my pitchers a better pick off move and delivery without losing any effect on their pitches. I can also make it where the batter will be an easy out as a reult of taking strikes.
SOme people say that distractions from a runner is good for the next batter. First, that has never been shown. Second, any value coming from there is usually wiped out by the fact that the batter has to hit behind in the count more often. This all cahnges on the level again!! A fifteen year old kid may wet his pants in certain situations, but that is a differnet level, different story. Unless that kid gets confidence he WILL NEVER SNIFF MLB ANYWAY. Those guys are weeded out fairly easy.
All the MLB stuff is studied and analyzed, and the stuff that fans usually attribute events too, 'clutch', 'team player', 'got 'em scared', and all the aother bullcrap you hear, usually stems from their experience as a youth. None of that stuff usually applies to reality of MLB. For every instance a guy uses to support his 'mythical' claims, there are usually three other instances that negate his claims! What the typical fan does is proceed with his claim based on his 'evidence', and then just ignore the other three instances. Thats where I come in.
<< <i>dallas-
it's obvious 'your' dislike is based on 'your' hero being ousted as the all time stolen base leader >>
As soo as I looked and saw Ozzie in his avatar I chalked his feeling up as jealousy. I figured he was a Brock fan and was just bitter that Rickey said that.
Trading away Brock was one of the best moves the Cubs ever made. Right below that is getting rid of Greg Maddux. They were much better teams without those 2 guys.
My Auctions
I'm not sure you're staying on topic here. You like to throw your numbers around, but paper just doesn't get it done for me. I have coached collegiate and currently HS baseball and played collegiate and professional baseball. At that level the single or walk from a player like Henderson would still have a terrific impact. We are talking about RICKEY HENDERSON here. NOT an 8 year-old. There are no misconceptions or inproper translations here. It's just baseball. I stated I agree that the homerun is not overrated--however, it is dangerous to build your offense around it. It can be neutralized. That's what I posted and I stand by that. Please try to stay on topic. I know you're DYING to quote minutia and use your CAPS button to make your fantasy points, but you are, I feel, attempting to give me a baseball lesson. Keep in mind while I type this I am wearing two State Championship rings and have a Southeast Regional championship ring as well as holding the best winning percentage in Northern Illinois over the last eight years. My post was not directed at the little-league Dad with a bad comb-over who just doesn't understand the game. It was about building a consistent...consistent offense around a player like Rickey Henderson. It was NOT about an 8 year-old rolling over a coach-fed lob and top-spinning it to short. You then went into your .03 runs vs. gorillas if you strike out against an asian pitcher with men on the corners and three fat ladies sitting behind the plate while an african-american umpire was eating a pizza with a bucket on his head, etc.
When did I--or anyone else argue this little nugget?
<< <i>Swinging the bat just to make contact has very little importance in MLB!! >>
I think you need to go back and re-read my post. You are addressing me on topics I never even thought of and you're using CAPS and EXCLAMATION POINTS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Look, Mr. Baseball Expert & Analyst, I too can purchase any one of the fifty thousand perspectus-type offerings or Bill James musings and post away all of the minutia and meaningless dribble that fantasy geeks like to cling to. The fact is, the game actually HAPPENS. Day by day it happens. And a player like Henderson (who this thread is about) is an impact player as he gets HIMSELF into scoring position consistently.
If you think 9 Kingman's would beat 9 Henderson's you're out of your mind and need professional counseling and perhaps to leave the country.
...by the way, teams that rely on HR in the post-season...how do they do against the better pitching? Gee, the pitching stops 'em there too...just like in little league. We may be on to something.
Numbers are just numbers and each situation in which those numbers need to be interpreted to make them relevant contains variables that need to be looked at deeper still. I am able to make these decisions on the fly--and have success-- while baseball is actually happening. You are interpreting the numbers at face value after the fact. The difference in the two is more than you or Bill James may ever know.
So, whenever a guy starts to talk down to the "typical fan", flaps his gums and starts talking absolutes based on numbers that are on a page without any regard for winning baseball games (the bunt is not efficient???????), he's drawing on his references of his strat-omatic chamionships and wiffle-ball games of HIS youth with his fellow geeks. That's where I come in.
dgf
PS: The bunt is not efficient thing...tell me it's not because a base for an out is a wash. You realize numbers don't take into account WHICH base and what follows right?