Posnanski on Raines
markj111
Posts: 2,921 ✭✭✭
in Sports Talk
Posnanski on Tim Raines and the HOF
Tim Raines
Last year: 37.5%
At the start, I brought up the point that few players get into the Hall of Fame for being good all-around players. In general, you need to do something surpassingly well. Get a lot of hits -- 3,000, for instance -- and that will put you in good shape. Hit a lot of home runs -- say 500 of them of them -- and you will likely get the call. Win batting titles, set a significant record, make a bunch of amazing defensive plays, these are usually the things that will capture the voters' hearts. There are exceptions, of course. But your best bet is to doing something amazing.
Tim Raines is probably the only guy on the ballot this year who can say that he was the very best ever at one prominent baseball skill. Raines is probably the best base stealer in the history of Major League Baseball. He does not have the MOST stolen bases -- he's fifth all-time. He does not have the highest stolen base percentage -- he's second among players with 200 stolen bases behind Carlos Beltran.
But when you put it together -- 808 stolen bases with only 146 times being caught -- it's the greatest combination in baseball history.
Tim Raines was a great player for five years, 1983-87, and a good player for the next 15. As I've written before, over his career, he reached base more times than Tony Gwynn and scored almost 200 more runs with those times on base. He happened to play in the era of the amazing Rickey Henderson, who you will notice ranked third on the "best all-around players ever" list above. He happened to play in the same outfield with Andre Dawson, who cast a big shadow. For these and other reasons, I think people tend to overlook a simple truth: Tim Raines was a great baseball player.
Tim Raines
Last year: 37.5%
At the start, I brought up the point that few players get into the Hall of Fame for being good all-around players. In general, you need to do something surpassingly well. Get a lot of hits -- 3,000, for instance -- and that will put you in good shape. Hit a lot of home runs -- say 500 of them of them -- and you will likely get the call. Win batting titles, set a significant record, make a bunch of amazing defensive plays, these are usually the things that will capture the voters' hearts. There are exceptions, of course. But your best bet is to doing something amazing.
Tim Raines is probably the only guy on the ballot this year who can say that he was the very best ever at one prominent baseball skill. Raines is probably the best base stealer in the history of Major League Baseball. He does not have the MOST stolen bases -- he's fifth all-time. He does not have the highest stolen base percentage -- he's second among players with 200 stolen bases behind Carlos Beltran.
But when you put it together -- 808 stolen bases with only 146 times being caught -- it's the greatest combination in baseball history.
Tim Raines was a great player for five years, 1983-87, and a good player for the next 15. As I've written before, over his career, he reached base more times than Tony Gwynn and scored almost 200 more runs with those times on base. He happened to play in the era of the amazing Rickey Henderson, who you will notice ranked third on the "best all-around players ever" list above. He happened to play in the same outfield with Andre Dawson, who cast a big shadow. For these and other reasons, I think people tend to overlook a simple truth: Tim Raines was a great baseball player.
0
Comments
For example,
We know that the criteria for HOF include:
Players ability
Players record
Players contribution to the team
Players character
If Raines is borderline for the first three, and then fails in the character part, then that may be a valid reason to keep him out.
Ty Cobb was also a failure in the character part...but he was so high in the other criteria that it could be a valid reason to still put him in.
The unfortunate thing is that the voters don't always quite know how to decipher the players record, ability, or his contribution to the team...and that is where most mistakes comes from, ahem, cough cough, Rice. For that type of mistake, the writers have no excuse for promoting ignorance. But, if they are actually taking ALL the above criteria into consideration, then there really can't be a beef about his exclusion.
Buying Vintage, all sports.
Buying Woody Hayes, Les Horvath, Vic Janowicz, and Jesse Owens autographed items
<< <i>So all you have to do is be a great player for 5 years then merely good for 15? Wow, what a watered down criteria. >>
I disagree. Koufax had five great years and virtually nothing else. There are a ton of HOFers who had fewer than five great years. Raines was as good as Gwynn. Is TG unworthy?
<< <i>Raines did not fall down on character. He went into rehab very early in his career, and had no relapses. >>
mark, there is no sense arguing with SABERMAN since he is ALWAYS right...
<< <i>Raines did not fall down on character. He went into rehab very early in his career, and had no relapses. >>
Mark,
Even if it was early in his career and had no relapses, it is still a black mark against his character.
I doubt the writers are looking at that though...most likely they just aren't reading his value accurately and believe he isn't that good(which we know is not the case).
<< <i>
<< <i>Raines did not fall down on character. He went into rehab very early in his career, and had no relapses. >>
Mark,
Even if it was early in his career and had no relapses, it is still a black mark against his character.
I doubt the writers are looking at that though...most likely they just aren't reading his value accurately and believe he isn't that good(which we know is not the case).
Mikesimo, not sure what got your panties in a bunch. I do know I am right at least twice a day when I manage to make my way to work and back home.
Well, I may be right thrice with Pujols and PED's >>
you lie, no way you have a job
You could also believe that Pujols has never done PED's.
....and you would be wrong on both counts
<< <i>So all you have to do is be a great player for 5 years then merely good for 15? Wow, what a watered down criteria. >>
I guess it depends on your criteria. You could be a guy like Robin Yount who had 7 very good seasons, a couple ok seasons, and a load of league average production (take out his 10 best seasons and he compiled just 16.9 WAR over half of his career) in 20 years while playing below league average defense, but I guess as long as you're health fortunate, you can rack up milestone marks like 3000 hits.
Buying Vintage, all sports.
Buying Woody Hayes, Les Horvath, Vic Janowicz, and Jesse Owens autographed items
G PA AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI SB CS BB SO BA OBP SLG OPS OPS+ TB GDP HBP SH SF IBB
MON (13 yrs) 1452 6256 5383 947 1622 281 82 96 556 635 106 793 569 .301 .391 .437 .829 131 2355 83 25 16 39 118
season high's = runs 133, sb's 90, avg. 334, hits 194, hr's 18, 2b 38, 3b 13, .955 ops and 7 All Star appearances, received MVP votes 7 years... over his time in Montreal
The baseball reference website shows he barely misses the HOF standards and monitor ranks.
Guess there's a movement to get him in...
Text
Working on the following: 1970 Baseball PSA, 1970-1976 Raw, World Series Subsets PSA, 1969 Expansion Teams PSA, Fleer World Series Sets, Texas Rangers Topps Run 1972-1989
----------------------
Successful deals to date: thedudeabides,gameusedhoop,golfcollector,tigerdean,treetop,bkritz, CapeMOGuy,WeekendHacker,jeff8877,backbidder,Salinas,milbroco,bbuckner22,VitoCo1972,ddfamf,gemint,K,fatty macs,waltersobchak,dboneesq