HOF Roundup-Very Long
markj111
Posts: 2,921 ✭✭✭
in Sports Talk
The Hall of Fame Roundup
Posted By Joe Posnanski On January 13, 2009 @ 12:08 am In Baseball | 156 Comments
Here it is … your 2009 overly long, absurdly obsessive, Hall of Fame recap.
Rickey Henderson (511 out of 539 votes, 94.8%): So, in the end, there were 28 people who did not vote for the all-time leader in runs, unintentional walks and stolen bases …
I do wonder how many people left Rickey off the ballot as some sort of political statement, and how many left him off because they honestly believe that Rickey Henderson does not belong in the Hall (you know the guy only hit .279). I wish every voter would express their reasoning … not for some sort of voter witch hunt, not to embarrass anyone, but because I’m genuinely curious about what voters think about this stuff.
Greg Maddux. That’s my next choice for unanimous. I simply cannot imagine how ANYONE will be able to vote against Greg Maddux. He has the core accomplishments — 355 wins, four Cy Young awards, 3,371 strikeouts, a terrific (for his time) 3.16 ERA. He has the intangibles — everyone loves what Maddux represented on the mound, and he seems utterly unblemished by scandal (with Maddux there never even seemed a motive for him to use steroids). His Hall of Fame call is five years away, but I’m already making the prediction: Greg Maddux will finish with the highest percentage in baseball history. And he has a shot at unanimous — I say he gets within five votes of unanimous.
* * *
Jim Rice (412 votes, 76.4%). Plenty — PLENTY — has already been said and written about Jim Rice, and there’s not a lot more to add. I will say this: I find it a fascinating study of human nature that Jim Rice was elected. Why? Well, you might recall that for years, common reasoning was that Jim Rice was being denied his rightful place in the Hall of Fame because he could be surly and not particularly good to the media and not especially likable.
And then, in the end, he was voted in even though numerous people with similar Hall of Fame credentials — men who WERE NOT surly, WERE good to the media, WERE likable — have not been elected. In many cases, these others never even came CLOSE to being elected. Just off the top of my head: Andre Dawson, Dale Murphy, Dwight Evans, Fred Lynn, Joe Torre, Ken Singleton, Keith Hernandez, Tim Raines, Don Mattingly, Rocky Colavito …
I’m not passing judgment now — Rice is in the Hall of Fame, and I’m happy for him. I’m just saying that’s kind of interesting.
Well, wait, one other thought: To once again quote my friend Ken Rosenthal: He wrote that Rice deserves induction because he met “my first essential requirement for a Hall of Famer — 10-year dominance.” I appreciate that. I respect anyone who has thought through what the Hall of Fame means and then is consistent in that thinking.
However, if 10-year of dominance is the theme then I would like to point out …
Rocky Colavito (1957-1966): Led the American League in games (1,533), homers (337), RBIs (1020), extra base hits (603), times on base (2,355), runs produced (1,545), outfield assists, … 2nd in Doubles (252 — to Kaline), runs (862 — to Mantle), walks (824 — to Mantle). Total Hall of Fame votes: 2 in 1974; 1 in 1975.
Dale Murphy (1981-1990): Led the National League in games (1,535), home runs (299), RBIs (923), walks (786), total bases (2,741), runs produced (1,524) and intentional walks (138) … 2nd in runs (900 — to Raines), 2nd in runs created (1002 — to Raines), 2nd in times on base (2,339 to Raines). Shows that Tim Raines was pretty dominant over a 10-year period too.
Dan Quisenberry (1990-1989): Led the American League (500-plus innings) in saves (233), games finished (482), ERA (2.53), ERA+ (162), walks per nine innings (1.35), fewest wild pitches (3). Set the save record. Had five Top 5 Cy Young Award finishes. Was on the Hall of Fame ballot for one season.
Ron Guidry (1977-1986): Led the American League in wins (163), winning percentage (.674), shutouts (26), starter ERA (3.23) and strikeouts (1,623 — 300 more than anyone else). That’s a 10-year Pitcher Triple Crown. Guidry did stay on the ballot for nine years, though he never got more than 8% of the vote.
Just something fun to think about.
* * *
Speaking of something to think about, here’s a game. Name the non-Hall of Famers. Answers on bottom.
Contestant No. 1: He’s a three-time Gold Glove outfielder who finished his career with a 129 OPS+. He played in a tough hitting environment, so if you neutralize his statistics, he has 364 homers and 504 stolen bases. Even as he was, his Power/Speed Number is fourth all-time, and over 162 games he averaged 29 homers, 40 stolen bases, 110 runs scored and 90 RBIs.
Contestant No. 2: He’s a seven-time Gold Glove outfielder who finished his career with a 127 OPS+. He had almost 2,500 hits, hit 385 home runs in his career and he hit .300 in his two World Series appearances. He also made one of the greatest defensive plays in World Series history.
Contestant No. 3: He’s a three-time Gold Glove second baseman who finished with a 116 OPS+. He hit double digit home runs thirteen times in his career, and he knocked out 2,369 hits. He scored more runs, drove in more runs, walked four hundred more times and struck out 150 fewer times than Ryne Sandberg.
Contestant No. 4: He won five Gold Gloves as a shortstop and many people — both scouts and statistical analysts — believe he has a case as the greatest fielding shortstop of all time, right there with Ozzie Smith. His OPS+ was better than Ozzie’s, and also better than Luis Aparicio’s and Rabbit Maranville’s — two other shortstops got in mainly for their great defense. He is one of only three shortstops in baseball history to put together the odd combination of 300 stolen bases and 900 RBIs.
Contestant No. 5: He had more hits than Monte Irvin, more doubles than John McGraw, more triples than Johnny Bench, Orlando Cepeda OR Harmon Killebrew. He had more triples than Roy Campanella and Branch Rickey combined. He had more stolen bases than Joe DiMaggio or Wade Boggs (and more caught stealing than Al Kaline or Roberto Clemente). He hit as many home runs as Hoyt Wilhelm and more than Tommy Lasorda or Don Sutton (though not quite as many as Sandy Koufax). He played second base with aplomb. He deserves his own wing in the Hall of Fame.
Contestant No. 6: He was Rookie of the Year and an MVP in separate seasons, twice led the league in on-base percentage, three times led the league in slugging percentage, and is one of the few people (only person?) to lead the league at different times in on-base percentage, slugging percentage, runs, RBIs, total bases, triples, homers, walks and adjusted OPS+. His career 156 OPS+ is better than all but thirteen players in the Hall of Fame.
* * *
Andre Dawson (361 votes, 67%): I heard some people say that there was some momentum for Dawson this year … but best I can tell he only picked up three votes. I do think he will get elected, but I’m not sure … I think it could be closer than many expect. The vibe today seems to be that the ballots for the next couple of years are not especially intriguing and the void could provide an opening for Dawson (and Blyleven).
But I don’t know if there is a void. It seems to me that next year’s ballot is actually quite loaded. A lot of people are saying there are no slam dunk Hall of Famers. Strange, I see two of them: Roberto Alomar and Barry Larkin.
– Alomar is a 10-time Gold Glove second baseman with a .300 lifetime batting average — he scored a monstrous 193.5 on the Hall of Fame Monitor (100 is a likely Hall of Famer). I’m not saying these are the numbers that make him Hall of Fame worthy — you know how about I feel about Gold Gloves and batting average. Alomar has all sorts of great statistics. No, what I’m saying is … there’s no way a 10-time Gold Glove second baseman who hit .300 for his career is not a slam-dunk Hall of Famer.
– Barry Larkin is, in the words of Bill James, one of the 10 most complete players in baseball history. In fact, when the Reds honored him this year along with Cesar Geronimo (09/09/09), they quoted Bill in the ceremony and put his quote on the JumboTron, which was kind of fun. Well, it’s true: Larkin hit, he hit for power, he walked, he stole bases, he played great defense, he turned the double play, he did not strike out, he won an MVP, he was better the year AFTER he won the MVP, he won the Clemente Award, he won the Gehrig Award, he rarely made mistakes and — not that this is a Hall of Fame quality, but it is cool — he played his whole career in his hometown.
To me, those are two surefire Hall of Famers — either the first year or soon thereafter. Then you add Fred McGriff, who had a REALLY good career that only looks better when placed against Jim Rice and Tony Perez and, yes, Andre Dawson too … I mean .284/.377/.509 with 493 career homers? On the downside, he wasn’t a defensive whiz by any means, and he couldn’t run, and he was only voted to five All-Star Games. But those numbers …
There’s one more. Next year’s ballot adds Edgar Martinez, who is honestly one of the best hitters in baseball history.
No joke. You know how many players in baseball history have 8,000 or more plate appearances and an OPS+ of 147? There are 26. And they are: Babe Ruth, Ted Williams, Barry Bonds, Lou Gehrig, Rogers Hornsby, Mickey Mantle, Ty Cobb, Jimmie Foxx, Stan Musial, Tris Speaker, Frank Thomas, Willie Mays, Manny Ramirez, Hank Aaron, Mel Ott, Frank Robinson, Honus Wagner, Nap Lajoie, Jeff Bagwell, Jim Thome, Harry Heilmann, A-Rod, Edgar Martinez, Mike Schmidt, Willie Stargell, Willie McCovey.
Every single one of those 26 is either center stage in the Hall of Fame or is going to be real soon … except Edgar (and maybe Thome … we’ll have a LOT more to say about one of my favorite guys over the next few years). Maybe it’s because Edgar didn’t play a full season until he was 27. Maybe it’s because he spent most of his career as a DH. Maybe it’s because he was never full appreciated playing those late games on the West Coast. But two batting titles, three OBP titles, led the league in runs, doubles, RBIs and a bunch of other stuff. He really was an amazing hitter. We’ll see what the voters think.
Anyway, I don’t think next year’s ballot is a really a down year. And Jeff Bagwell hops on in 2011. I do see a down-ballot in 2012, though, before all hell breaks loose in 2013 (Barry, Clemens, Piazza, Sosa, Schilling, etc.).
* * *
Bert Blyleven (338 votes, 62.7%). Up only two votes this year … not a whole lot of momentum there. Sigh. I fear what Blyleven is missing is a solid theme, a slogan, a new campaign, something to rival “Most fearsome hitter of his time.” I’m not going to lie: I don’t think, “Guy whose numbers impress a lot of Internet Geeks” is getting it done for us.
Maybe we need to simply play up his shutouts. I think we all know that shutouts are good things … and they are an old fashioned thing. The old writers should APPRECIATE a good shutout. And shutouts are not things that you can just COMPILE by hanging around. Pedro Martinez is 36 years old, he has an argument as the most dominant pitcher ever, and I suspect he will NEVER throw another shutout.
So, let me kickoff the new “Project Shutout” by putting it this way:
Bert Blyleven has more shutouts than Bob Gibson. He has more shutouts than Juan Marichal. He has more shutouts than Roger Clemens and Randy Johnson — a lot more than either of them. He has more shutouts than Jim Palmer, Gaylord Perry, Fergie Jenkins or Robin Roberts. He, of course, has more shutouts than Koufax, who had his career shortened, and he has more shutouts than Phil Niekro who pitched forever. He has more shutouts than Three Finger Brown, more than Five Finger And Some Sandpaper Don Sutton, more than Early Wynn, who threw at batter’s fingers.
Bert Blyleven has more shutouts than Lefty Grove, Lefty Gomez, Lefty Hoerst, Lefty Tyler, lefty Hopper, Lefty Williams, Lefty Stewart and any other pitcher named Lefty including Steve Carlton, who was nicknamed Lefty.
Bert Blyleven has more shutouts than Bob Lemon and Jack Morris combined.
Bert Blyleven has more shutouts than Greg Maddux and Mike Mussina combined.
Bert Blyleven has more shutouts than Whitey Ford and Don Gullett combined.
Bert Blyleven has more shutouts than Bob Feller PLUS Roy Halladay.
Bert Blyleven has more shutouts than Tom Glavine PLUS John Smoltz and you could throw Babe Ruth’s 18 shutouts on top of that and still not get there.
Bert Blyleven has more shutouts than Curt Schilling PLUS Pedro Martinez PLUS Johnny Sain PLUS Two Days of Rain PLUS Roy Oswalt.
Bert Blyleven had more shutouts in 1973 than Johan Santana has in his career.
Let’s put it this way: Since 1920 — the beginning of the lively ball era — Bert Blyleven ranks fourth in shutouts. Only Warren Spahn, Nolan Ryan and Tom Seaver have thrown more shutouts. Spahn has three more. Ryan and Seaver each have one more. They are all in the Hall of Fame, first-ballot, never a doubt. I’m just not sure what we are waiting for.
Don’t make me do this same exercise with strikeouts. Because I will.
* * *
Lee Smith (240 votes, 43.3%): Five more votes than in 2008. But he still has not matched his career-high percentage in 2006. I suspect that Lee Smith may tread water for a while and might not be viewed seriously by the voters until, like Jim Rice, his time on the ballot is about to run out.
* * *
Jack Morris (237 votes, 44.0%): Up four votes from 2008, so not a lot of movement there. I cannot tell if Morris is sort of topping out now or if he will have one more major push — this was his 10th year on the ballot, so time is running out. Morris does seem to have the right kind of mythology around him, but the fact he has not yet broken the magical 50% mark is probably a bad sign. Jim Rice broke the 50% barrier in his seventh year on the ballot*.
*When for some reason Rice picked up 111 votes and went from 29.4% all the way to 51.5%. That’s a HUGE jump. he must have had a really good 1999 season.
* * *
Tommy John (171 votes, 31.7%): This was his final year on the ballot … he always had reasonable support, but he never quite got any real voting momentum going. It’s a shame — he does have 288 wins, a better ERA+ than Morris, an impressive 46 shutouts, and he missed the entire 1975 season because of the surgery that bears his name.
I have, in the past, poked fun at the idea that he should get Hall of Fame bonus points for the surgery — after all he didn’t PERFORM it — but that was probably unfair. He risked everything having the surgery, and he came back from it, and he showed the way for pitchers the last 30-plus years. I think he’s a pivotal character in baseball history. I voted for him, and I’m glad I did.
* * *
Tim Raines (122 votes, 22.6%): My biggest disappointment in the voting this year is that Tim Raines actually went BACKWARD. I can’t for the life of me figure this out. Maybe it’s because Rickey Henderson was on the ballot and a few people felt like they could only vote for one great leadoff hitter at a time. I don’t know. Raines was a great player on so many different levels. I hope that he starts to gain some Hall of Fame traction next year.
* * *
Mark McGwire (118 votes, 21.9%): He went backward too … lost 10 votes (more than 10 because I voted for him for the first time this year) … I was entirely wrong about him. I thought that as time went on and we all gained a little bit better perspective of baseball in the 1990s, McGwire would look better and would get more support. But the opposite seems to be happening, feelings about McGwire and the steroid era seem to be hardening. I am becoming more and more convinced that Barry Bonds will absolutely NOT make it to the Hall of Fame first ballot. In fact, I’m wondering if he will even get close.
* * *
Alan Trammell (94 votes, 18.2%): He’s five votes down from 2008, and I fear he will take a terrible tumble in 2010 when superior middle infielders Barry Larkin and Roberto Alomar are added to the ballot. It’s a shame: The Tigers had some REALLY good teams in the 1980s, and there has been almost no Hall of Fame support for the two players who were most responsible — Trammell and Lou Whitaker. Meanwhile, plenty of people talk about how Jack Morris was a winner.
* * *
Dave Parker (81 votes, 15%)
Don Mattingly (64 votes, 11.9%)
Dale Murphy (62 votes, 11.5%)
Jim Rice’s first ballot he received 137 votes. On Don Mattingly’s first ballot, he got 145. On Dave Parker’s second ballot, he got 116. On Dale Murphy’s second ballot he got 116.
Somehow, Rice emerged the winner. And the rest have gone backward.
* * *
Harold Baines (32 votes, 5.9%): Professional hitter.
Mark Grace (22 votes, 4.1%): Most hits in the 1990s … by seven over Rafael Palmeiro.
David Cone (21 votes, 3.9%): From 1988-1998, only Maddux, Clemens and Glavine won more, and only Clemens and Unit struck out more. If he had gotten a chance when he was 23, if he could have kept his arm together after he turned 36 …
Matt Williams (7 votes, 1.3%): What if there had not been a strike in 1994 and he had broken Maris’ record?
Mo Vaughn (6 votes, 1.1%): His MVP year of 1995 was probably the worst year he had in the five years between 1994 and 1998. Albert Belle should have won that MVP anyway … or Edgar Martinez.
Jay Bell (2 votes): Come on. One vote, OK, that’s a good joke. But TWO Jay Bell votes?
Jesse Orosco (1 vote): He could have gotten more support. The guy pitched in 1,252 games and had a 125 career ERA+.
* * *
Ron Gant (0 votes)
Greg Vaughn (0 votes)
Dan Plesac (0 votes)
Fine players … each of them at their best was better than Jay Bell.
* * *
OK, here are your quiz answers. AFLAC. Ask about it at work. I’m sure you guessed them all.
Contestant No. 1: Bobby Bonds.
Contestant No. 2: Dwight Evans
Contestant No. 3: Lou Whitaker
Contestant No. 4: Dave Concepcion
Contestant No. 5: Duane Kuiper, of course.
Contestant No. 6: Dick Allen
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted By Joe Posnanski On January 13, 2009 @ 12:08 am In Baseball | 156 Comments
Here it is … your 2009 overly long, absurdly obsessive, Hall of Fame recap.
Rickey Henderson (511 out of 539 votes, 94.8%): So, in the end, there were 28 people who did not vote for the all-time leader in runs, unintentional walks and stolen bases …
I do wonder how many people left Rickey off the ballot as some sort of political statement, and how many left him off because they honestly believe that Rickey Henderson does not belong in the Hall (you know the guy only hit .279). I wish every voter would express their reasoning … not for some sort of voter witch hunt, not to embarrass anyone, but because I’m genuinely curious about what voters think about this stuff.
Greg Maddux. That’s my next choice for unanimous. I simply cannot imagine how ANYONE will be able to vote against Greg Maddux. He has the core accomplishments — 355 wins, four Cy Young awards, 3,371 strikeouts, a terrific (for his time) 3.16 ERA. He has the intangibles — everyone loves what Maddux represented on the mound, and he seems utterly unblemished by scandal (with Maddux there never even seemed a motive for him to use steroids). His Hall of Fame call is five years away, but I’m already making the prediction: Greg Maddux will finish with the highest percentage in baseball history. And he has a shot at unanimous — I say he gets within five votes of unanimous.
* * *
Jim Rice (412 votes, 76.4%). Plenty — PLENTY — has already been said and written about Jim Rice, and there’s not a lot more to add. I will say this: I find it a fascinating study of human nature that Jim Rice was elected. Why? Well, you might recall that for years, common reasoning was that Jim Rice was being denied his rightful place in the Hall of Fame because he could be surly and not particularly good to the media and not especially likable.
And then, in the end, he was voted in even though numerous people with similar Hall of Fame credentials — men who WERE NOT surly, WERE good to the media, WERE likable — have not been elected. In many cases, these others never even came CLOSE to being elected. Just off the top of my head: Andre Dawson, Dale Murphy, Dwight Evans, Fred Lynn, Joe Torre, Ken Singleton, Keith Hernandez, Tim Raines, Don Mattingly, Rocky Colavito …
I’m not passing judgment now — Rice is in the Hall of Fame, and I’m happy for him. I’m just saying that’s kind of interesting.
Well, wait, one other thought: To once again quote my friend Ken Rosenthal: He wrote that Rice deserves induction because he met “my first essential requirement for a Hall of Famer — 10-year dominance.” I appreciate that. I respect anyone who has thought through what the Hall of Fame means and then is consistent in that thinking.
However, if 10-year of dominance is the theme then I would like to point out …
Rocky Colavito (1957-1966): Led the American League in games (1,533), homers (337), RBIs (1020), extra base hits (603), times on base (2,355), runs produced (1,545), outfield assists, … 2nd in Doubles (252 — to Kaline), runs (862 — to Mantle), walks (824 — to Mantle). Total Hall of Fame votes: 2 in 1974; 1 in 1975.
Dale Murphy (1981-1990): Led the National League in games (1,535), home runs (299), RBIs (923), walks (786), total bases (2,741), runs produced (1,524) and intentional walks (138) … 2nd in runs (900 — to Raines), 2nd in runs created (1002 — to Raines), 2nd in times on base (2,339 to Raines). Shows that Tim Raines was pretty dominant over a 10-year period too.
Dan Quisenberry (1990-1989): Led the American League (500-plus innings) in saves (233), games finished (482), ERA (2.53), ERA+ (162), walks per nine innings (1.35), fewest wild pitches (3). Set the save record. Had five Top 5 Cy Young Award finishes. Was on the Hall of Fame ballot for one season.
Ron Guidry (1977-1986): Led the American League in wins (163), winning percentage (.674), shutouts (26), starter ERA (3.23) and strikeouts (1,623 — 300 more than anyone else). That’s a 10-year Pitcher Triple Crown. Guidry did stay on the ballot for nine years, though he never got more than 8% of the vote.
Just something fun to think about.
* * *
Speaking of something to think about, here’s a game. Name the non-Hall of Famers. Answers on bottom.
Contestant No. 1: He’s a three-time Gold Glove outfielder who finished his career with a 129 OPS+. He played in a tough hitting environment, so if you neutralize his statistics, he has 364 homers and 504 stolen bases. Even as he was, his Power/Speed Number is fourth all-time, and over 162 games he averaged 29 homers, 40 stolen bases, 110 runs scored and 90 RBIs.
Contestant No. 2: He’s a seven-time Gold Glove outfielder who finished his career with a 127 OPS+. He had almost 2,500 hits, hit 385 home runs in his career and he hit .300 in his two World Series appearances. He also made one of the greatest defensive plays in World Series history.
Contestant No. 3: He’s a three-time Gold Glove second baseman who finished with a 116 OPS+. He hit double digit home runs thirteen times in his career, and he knocked out 2,369 hits. He scored more runs, drove in more runs, walked four hundred more times and struck out 150 fewer times than Ryne Sandberg.
Contestant No. 4: He won five Gold Gloves as a shortstop and many people — both scouts and statistical analysts — believe he has a case as the greatest fielding shortstop of all time, right there with Ozzie Smith. His OPS+ was better than Ozzie’s, and also better than Luis Aparicio’s and Rabbit Maranville’s — two other shortstops got in mainly for their great defense. He is one of only three shortstops in baseball history to put together the odd combination of 300 stolen bases and 900 RBIs.
Contestant No. 5: He had more hits than Monte Irvin, more doubles than John McGraw, more triples than Johnny Bench, Orlando Cepeda OR Harmon Killebrew. He had more triples than Roy Campanella and Branch Rickey combined. He had more stolen bases than Joe DiMaggio or Wade Boggs (and more caught stealing than Al Kaline or Roberto Clemente). He hit as many home runs as Hoyt Wilhelm and more than Tommy Lasorda or Don Sutton (though not quite as many as Sandy Koufax). He played second base with aplomb. He deserves his own wing in the Hall of Fame.
Contestant No. 6: He was Rookie of the Year and an MVP in separate seasons, twice led the league in on-base percentage, three times led the league in slugging percentage, and is one of the few people (only person?) to lead the league at different times in on-base percentage, slugging percentage, runs, RBIs, total bases, triples, homers, walks and adjusted OPS+. His career 156 OPS+ is better than all but thirteen players in the Hall of Fame.
* * *
Andre Dawson (361 votes, 67%): I heard some people say that there was some momentum for Dawson this year … but best I can tell he only picked up three votes. I do think he will get elected, but I’m not sure … I think it could be closer than many expect. The vibe today seems to be that the ballots for the next couple of years are not especially intriguing and the void could provide an opening for Dawson (and Blyleven).
But I don’t know if there is a void. It seems to me that next year’s ballot is actually quite loaded. A lot of people are saying there are no slam dunk Hall of Famers. Strange, I see two of them: Roberto Alomar and Barry Larkin.
– Alomar is a 10-time Gold Glove second baseman with a .300 lifetime batting average — he scored a monstrous 193.5 on the Hall of Fame Monitor (100 is a likely Hall of Famer). I’m not saying these are the numbers that make him Hall of Fame worthy — you know how about I feel about Gold Gloves and batting average. Alomar has all sorts of great statistics. No, what I’m saying is … there’s no way a 10-time Gold Glove second baseman who hit .300 for his career is not a slam-dunk Hall of Famer.
– Barry Larkin is, in the words of Bill James, one of the 10 most complete players in baseball history. In fact, when the Reds honored him this year along with Cesar Geronimo (09/09/09), they quoted Bill in the ceremony and put his quote on the JumboTron, which was kind of fun. Well, it’s true: Larkin hit, he hit for power, he walked, he stole bases, he played great defense, he turned the double play, he did not strike out, he won an MVP, he was better the year AFTER he won the MVP, he won the Clemente Award, he won the Gehrig Award, he rarely made mistakes and — not that this is a Hall of Fame quality, but it is cool — he played his whole career in his hometown.
To me, those are two surefire Hall of Famers — either the first year or soon thereafter. Then you add Fred McGriff, who had a REALLY good career that only looks better when placed against Jim Rice and Tony Perez and, yes, Andre Dawson too … I mean .284/.377/.509 with 493 career homers? On the downside, he wasn’t a defensive whiz by any means, and he couldn’t run, and he was only voted to five All-Star Games. But those numbers …
There’s one more. Next year’s ballot adds Edgar Martinez, who is honestly one of the best hitters in baseball history.
No joke. You know how many players in baseball history have 8,000 or more plate appearances and an OPS+ of 147? There are 26. And they are: Babe Ruth, Ted Williams, Barry Bonds, Lou Gehrig, Rogers Hornsby, Mickey Mantle, Ty Cobb, Jimmie Foxx, Stan Musial, Tris Speaker, Frank Thomas, Willie Mays, Manny Ramirez, Hank Aaron, Mel Ott, Frank Robinson, Honus Wagner, Nap Lajoie, Jeff Bagwell, Jim Thome, Harry Heilmann, A-Rod, Edgar Martinez, Mike Schmidt, Willie Stargell, Willie McCovey.
Every single one of those 26 is either center stage in the Hall of Fame or is going to be real soon … except Edgar (and maybe Thome … we’ll have a LOT more to say about one of my favorite guys over the next few years). Maybe it’s because Edgar didn’t play a full season until he was 27. Maybe it’s because he spent most of his career as a DH. Maybe it’s because he was never full appreciated playing those late games on the West Coast. But two batting titles, three OBP titles, led the league in runs, doubles, RBIs and a bunch of other stuff. He really was an amazing hitter. We’ll see what the voters think.
Anyway, I don’t think next year’s ballot is a really a down year. And Jeff Bagwell hops on in 2011. I do see a down-ballot in 2012, though, before all hell breaks loose in 2013 (Barry, Clemens, Piazza, Sosa, Schilling, etc.).
* * *
Bert Blyleven (338 votes, 62.7%). Up only two votes this year … not a whole lot of momentum there. Sigh. I fear what Blyleven is missing is a solid theme, a slogan, a new campaign, something to rival “Most fearsome hitter of his time.” I’m not going to lie: I don’t think, “Guy whose numbers impress a lot of Internet Geeks” is getting it done for us.
Maybe we need to simply play up his shutouts. I think we all know that shutouts are good things … and they are an old fashioned thing. The old writers should APPRECIATE a good shutout. And shutouts are not things that you can just COMPILE by hanging around. Pedro Martinez is 36 years old, he has an argument as the most dominant pitcher ever, and I suspect he will NEVER throw another shutout.
So, let me kickoff the new “Project Shutout” by putting it this way:
Bert Blyleven has more shutouts than Bob Gibson. He has more shutouts than Juan Marichal. He has more shutouts than Roger Clemens and Randy Johnson — a lot more than either of them. He has more shutouts than Jim Palmer, Gaylord Perry, Fergie Jenkins or Robin Roberts. He, of course, has more shutouts than Koufax, who had his career shortened, and he has more shutouts than Phil Niekro who pitched forever. He has more shutouts than Three Finger Brown, more than Five Finger And Some Sandpaper Don Sutton, more than Early Wynn, who threw at batter’s fingers.
Bert Blyleven has more shutouts than Lefty Grove, Lefty Gomez, Lefty Hoerst, Lefty Tyler, lefty Hopper, Lefty Williams, Lefty Stewart and any other pitcher named Lefty including Steve Carlton, who was nicknamed Lefty.
Bert Blyleven has more shutouts than Bob Lemon and Jack Morris combined.
Bert Blyleven has more shutouts than Greg Maddux and Mike Mussina combined.
Bert Blyleven has more shutouts than Whitey Ford and Don Gullett combined.
Bert Blyleven has more shutouts than Bob Feller PLUS Roy Halladay.
Bert Blyleven has more shutouts than Tom Glavine PLUS John Smoltz and you could throw Babe Ruth’s 18 shutouts on top of that and still not get there.
Bert Blyleven has more shutouts than Curt Schilling PLUS Pedro Martinez PLUS Johnny Sain PLUS Two Days of Rain PLUS Roy Oswalt.
Bert Blyleven had more shutouts in 1973 than Johan Santana has in his career.
Let’s put it this way: Since 1920 — the beginning of the lively ball era — Bert Blyleven ranks fourth in shutouts. Only Warren Spahn, Nolan Ryan and Tom Seaver have thrown more shutouts. Spahn has three more. Ryan and Seaver each have one more. They are all in the Hall of Fame, first-ballot, never a doubt. I’m just not sure what we are waiting for.
Don’t make me do this same exercise with strikeouts. Because I will.
* * *
Lee Smith (240 votes, 43.3%): Five more votes than in 2008. But he still has not matched his career-high percentage in 2006. I suspect that Lee Smith may tread water for a while and might not be viewed seriously by the voters until, like Jim Rice, his time on the ballot is about to run out.
* * *
Jack Morris (237 votes, 44.0%): Up four votes from 2008, so not a lot of movement there. I cannot tell if Morris is sort of topping out now or if he will have one more major push — this was his 10th year on the ballot, so time is running out. Morris does seem to have the right kind of mythology around him, but the fact he has not yet broken the magical 50% mark is probably a bad sign. Jim Rice broke the 50% barrier in his seventh year on the ballot*.
*When for some reason Rice picked up 111 votes and went from 29.4% all the way to 51.5%. That’s a HUGE jump. he must have had a really good 1999 season.
* * *
Tommy John (171 votes, 31.7%): This was his final year on the ballot … he always had reasonable support, but he never quite got any real voting momentum going. It’s a shame — he does have 288 wins, a better ERA+ than Morris, an impressive 46 shutouts, and he missed the entire 1975 season because of the surgery that bears his name.
I have, in the past, poked fun at the idea that he should get Hall of Fame bonus points for the surgery — after all he didn’t PERFORM it — but that was probably unfair. He risked everything having the surgery, and he came back from it, and he showed the way for pitchers the last 30-plus years. I think he’s a pivotal character in baseball history. I voted for him, and I’m glad I did.
* * *
Tim Raines (122 votes, 22.6%): My biggest disappointment in the voting this year is that Tim Raines actually went BACKWARD. I can’t for the life of me figure this out. Maybe it’s because Rickey Henderson was on the ballot and a few people felt like they could only vote for one great leadoff hitter at a time. I don’t know. Raines was a great player on so many different levels. I hope that he starts to gain some Hall of Fame traction next year.
* * *
Mark McGwire (118 votes, 21.9%): He went backward too … lost 10 votes (more than 10 because I voted for him for the first time this year) … I was entirely wrong about him. I thought that as time went on and we all gained a little bit better perspective of baseball in the 1990s, McGwire would look better and would get more support. But the opposite seems to be happening, feelings about McGwire and the steroid era seem to be hardening. I am becoming more and more convinced that Barry Bonds will absolutely NOT make it to the Hall of Fame first ballot. In fact, I’m wondering if he will even get close.
* * *
Alan Trammell (94 votes, 18.2%): He’s five votes down from 2008, and I fear he will take a terrible tumble in 2010 when superior middle infielders Barry Larkin and Roberto Alomar are added to the ballot. It’s a shame: The Tigers had some REALLY good teams in the 1980s, and there has been almost no Hall of Fame support for the two players who were most responsible — Trammell and Lou Whitaker. Meanwhile, plenty of people talk about how Jack Morris was a winner.
* * *
Dave Parker (81 votes, 15%)
Don Mattingly (64 votes, 11.9%)
Dale Murphy (62 votes, 11.5%)
Jim Rice’s first ballot he received 137 votes. On Don Mattingly’s first ballot, he got 145. On Dave Parker’s second ballot, he got 116. On Dale Murphy’s second ballot he got 116.
Somehow, Rice emerged the winner. And the rest have gone backward.
* * *
Harold Baines (32 votes, 5.9%): Professional hitter.
Mark Grace (22 votes, 4.1%): Most hits in the 1990s … by seven over Rafael Palmeiro.
David Cone (21 votes, 3.9%): From 1988-1998, only Maddux, Clemens and Glavine won more, and only Clemens and Unit struck out more. If he had gotten a chance when he was 23, if he could have kept his arm together after he turned 36 …
Matt Williams (7 votes, 1.3%): What if there had not been a strike in 1994 and he had broken Maris’ record?
Mo Vaughn (6 votes, 1.1%): His MVP year of 1995 was probably the worst year he had in the five years between 1994 and 1998. Albert Belle should have won that MVP anyway … or Edgar Martinez.
Jay Bell (2 votes): Come on. One vote, OK, that’s a good joke. But TWO Jay Bell votes?
Jesse Orosco (1 vote): He could have gotten more support. The guy pitched in 1,252 games and had a 125 career ERA+.
* * *
Ron Gant (0 votes)
Greg Vaughn (0 votes)
Dan Plesac (0 votes)
Fine players … each of them at their best was better than Jay Bell.
* * *
OK, here are your quiz answers. AFLAC. Ask about it at work. I’m sure you guessed them all.
Contestant No. 1: Bobby Bonds.
Contestant No. 2: Dwight Evans
Contestant No. 3: Lou Whitaker
Contestant No. 4: Dave Concepcion
Contestant No. 5: Duane Kuiper, of course.
Contestant No. 6: Dick Allen
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
Comments
blyleven should be in
Seems a reasonable, and a positive note for Edgar, a fairly elite group to be amongst.
Some upset with HOFer Jim Rice, fail to see any possible cause to note similarity with an even smaller group;
Jim Rice could hit for both power and average, and currently only nine other HOF hitters rank ahead of him in both career home runs and batting average: Hank Aaron, Jimmie Foxx, Lou Gehrig, Mickey Mantle, Willie Mays, Stan Musial, Mel Ott, Babe Ruth and Ted Williams.
agreed.
Your blinders are truly amazing in regard to Rice. You bypass what is said in the article, and isntead post that same old list that doesn't account for playing in the best hitters park in the league. Try doubling Rice's road numbers and see if he still makes your little 'club'
You also fail to note that a guy can have a batting average a few points lower than Rice(thus not make that little 'club'), and still be light years better. That is why those little clubs are senseless. I think I showed you that with the other 'clubs' that can be made.
But, this certainly makes a lot of sense of my new sigline!! LOL!
...................................
Larry Walker is one of my real favorites,
you might have mentioned arm quality, Larry had a much better arm than those listed, keep those LW items coming !
Despite playing in Coors field for just some 30% of his MLB games, and despite drinking plently of Coor's Light, and regardless of knowing who Adolph Coors was, Larry Walker was a very fine all around baseball player.
Walker's lifetime numbers at Coors field...
.381 AVG
.462 OB%
.710 SLG%
1.172 OPS
His lifetime batting average outside of Colorado? .282. You can do the math for the OB% and SLG%(I'm not going to hold your hand).
Walker only has 6,907 at bats. A .282 average in 6,900 at bats is not as valuable as a .282 AVG in 10,000 at bats.
Oh, and Jim Rice's real club is, all players with a career avg of .277 and 348 or more HR's. This club eliminates the extremely unfair advantage that Rice had hitting at Fenway while the other sluggers didn't have that luxury.
That club grows much more Jaxxr, if you look at guys who were actually good enough to play into their 40's(who saw their avg drop a few points, but provided MLB value, while Rice provided the same MLB value as you...nothing).
Or like Killebrew or Schmidt who are just a few points in AVG behind him, and dwarf him in HR and complete measures, Rice's entry into that club you often post is of little importance. Why you keep posting it is a mystery, and the joke of the board.
the imperfect averages, or BF, do show Coors as much more likely to aid a hitter, and of course the performances and BF change, each season, with usually no dimension alterations, merely different sets of ballplayers doing the changing. The famous 37 foot high wall in the LF of Fenway, might deter more HRs than the 8 foot high wall at Coors, for a RH hitter.
BF in detail will show differences for a LH and RH batter, Fenway 2002 shows RH getting a 100 or neutral factor, in respect to HRs, 2002 Coors shows a 124 as the HR factor, for righty batters, singles, doubles, and triples all have respective averages/tendencies as well.
Do Larry Walker's other quite important skills, like fine baserunning, very good glove, very good stolen base numbers, excellent throwing arm, offset that 30% of his numbers were done at Coors ?
When Walker is on the ballot, voters will decide just how much a good hitter, who normally adapts and adjusts to his particular home park anyway, should be penalized for playing 30% at Coors, he will be the first guy nominated, to have a goodly amount of games at Coors.
Edgar Martinez will soon become the first guy decided upon, as to how much penalty is due a primary DH.
Jim Rice didn't play in 2000.
Ballparks are measured relative to the others in the leauge.
Randomness changes a park factor on a year to year basis.
None of the jibberish you said takes away from Jim Rice having the immense benefit of Fenway in his day, or Walker in Coors in his day.
Any 'adjustment' a ballplayer make in his park is reflected in a ballpark measurement.
Read the thread created on looking at Fenway and Oakland. Are the Oakland guys morons for not being able to 'adjust'??? And all the Fenway guys Einsteins's because they all had significantly higher performances at Fenway?
Ballparks CAN affect LH and RH differently, though that doesn't affect the case of Rice or Walker.
Jaxxr, I would love to get together with you, go to the local little league complex and have a HR hitting contest. I get to hit at the 12 year old field, and you at the 18 yr old field. Only when the context is applied directly to YOU, will you finally have some sense knocked into you, and understand.
Jaxxr, you seem to idolize the writers for the Hall. I know they don't know what they are talking about. I guess that is where we differ quite often.
although I'll admit that Walker was a real favorite of mine, and I hope future investigation and other comments may aid his HOF likelyhood. The various HOF rates and inks, show Walker with 2 out of 4, not as good as some guys already in the baseball HOF, like Eddie Murray and Jim Rice who each got 3 out of 4..
One is the first potential fellow who was primarily a DH, the other is the first to play a decent amount ( 30% ) of his games at Coors, the highest rated via PF, hitter friendly park, currently in use.
It shall be interesting to see how those two are evenutually finalized, as to their impact, fame, and their multiple stats, defensive ( or a lack thereof ), baserunning, and offensive.
Thos HOF monitors, Black ink etc... do not account for park factor either. Since most writers are ignorant on the subject of baseball, I agree that they may look at that stuff too and think it is indicative of the players ability. They would be wrong of course.
Walker would be going into the HOF if he had done one thing....play 150 games a year. Either because he was made of glass, or because he had no pain tolerance(was a.....p u s s y), he didn't play every day.
He played 150 games just one time in his career. I haven't looked, but if you wish to, can you find a HOF hitter that managed to play only 150 games just once in their career? For pre 1961 guys, look for 140 game threshold.
His playing value takes a big hit with not be able to play everyday. A guy who is just a little less of a player than him, but played every day is the more preferential player.
The funny thing about it, is that he was a better player than Rice, and where Rice's park factor was completely ignored by the writers, Walker's won't be...and in the end your hero(walker) won't be getting in due to the things that you completely ignored or dismissed for Rice in your campaign for him. Ironic, isn't it?
Edited to add...Jaxxr, do you know what that quote in your sig line means, or is referring to?
What is really ironic, or perhaps the term "pityful" would be more appropriate,
is some people's inability to accept facts, such as Rice's inclusive into baseball's HOF, all the whining they may do, will never change that fact, he got elected by the regular process, most of us can move on to other players, like Larry Walker or Edgar Martinez, both somewhat unique..
It still may be possible, when people start to evaluate in-depth, the baserunning, the glove, the throwing arm, the base stealing, and other aspects of Larry Walker, those featues might possibly offset the 30% Coors bias, maybe not, but I would certainly be interested in more than one opinion.
Lets go to that park and have that HR contest and see if context does matter, and that facts without proper context, don't tell us anything meaningful.
The funny thing is that your Kingman/Wagner method that was applied to Rice's case, will not be used in Walkers case...thus excluding him from HOF entrance. LOL!
Oh, you still haven't answered. What do you think gary carter's quote means in your signline? LOL, you tried to use it to prove some point, and it doesn't even apply!
I was evidently mistaken in thinking a couple non-HOFers, new fellows, like Walker and/or Matrinez might be discussed, apparently old stuff is better suited for some.
<< <i>Gary Carter, Jim Rice and Eddie Murray are ALL bona-fide members of baseball's HOF.
Huh? Your signline Gary Carter quote compares Andre Dawsons attitude approach to that of Murray's. You don't understand this either?
Jaxxr, the old stuff applies to the new stuff, because your Kingman/Wagner methods are still in use with the new comparisons. Though i will give you credit for actually recognizing Coors as having an impact on Walker's stats, considering you are blind to Fenway's on Rice's.
Maybe there is being progress made.
That is why I said it was ironic. Ignoring the park factor helped Rice get into the Hall, while it is going to end up being applied to your hero Larry Walker, and he won't get in. You are blind to one for some reason(someone asked if Rice was your father, and maybe that is the reason), but not blind on the other. That is a staple of the Kingman/Wagner method.
EDITED TO ADD: Why would anyone want to get into a detailed discussion with you, when you continually fail to see the most obvious points, and completely ignore very important factors. I do it just to have fun seeing your goofy methods.
Skinpinch / Hoopster,
YOU are continiously responding, to all my posts, off the subject mostly,
and it seems you desire to provoke some foolish remarks, none possibly as foolish as your own personal comparison of Honus Wagner to Dave Kingman, which you,yourself, personally further proceeded to insert into 3 or 4 other threads, and then followed up with another of your original concepts, compare Pete Rose to Dave Kingman.
I did compare two HOFers, from the same time era, who had many similar statistical aspects.
"Mark McGwire (118 votes, 21.9%): He went backward too … lost 10 votes (more than 10 because I voted for him for the first time this year) … I was entirely wrong about him. I thought that as time went on and we all gained a little bit better perspective of baseball in the 1990s, McGwire would look better and would get more support. But the opposite seems to be happening, feelings about McGwire and the steroid era seem to be hardening. I am becoming more and more convinced that Barry Bonds will absolutely NOT make it to the Hall of Fame first ballot. In fact, I’m wondering if he will even get close."
Biig Mac and Barry are certainly interesting cases, and worthy of some talk.
Should the man, McGwire, with the greatest HR frequency of all time, be left out ?
Should the man with the most HRs ever, Bonds, be disregarded ?
Is there any absolute proof of substance violations, are they both guilty, befor proved innocent ?
It is comical that you are worried about the Kingman/Wagner comparison...and that you don't get the purpose of that.
Barry Bonds was a HOFer before he did juice. He may get a little more leeway from the voters as a result. Same fro Roger Clemens.
Mac was very good before the juice, but he ahd some bad years just before...it may not have been enough for the voters.