Options
Who should be in the Hall.
lightningboy
Posts: 1,483 ✭✭✭
Name one player who played during the last 50 years that strictly based on their on field exploits should be in the Baseball Hall of Fame, and why? I'm looking for players whose only hope now is the Veteran's committee. Please dont say Pete Rose as that would probably be everyone's first choice.
0
Comments
WTB: PSA 1 - PSA 3 Centered, High Eye Appeal 1950's Mantle
PSA HOF Baseball Postwar Rookies Set Registry- (Currently 77.97% Complete)
PSA Pro Football HOF Rookie Players Set Registry- (Currently 19.26% Complete)
PSA Basketball HOF Players Rookies Set Registry- (Currently 6.02% Complete)
<< <i>Sorry, my pick would be Garvey. Consistent all star for over 10+ years and performed very highly on all stages: regular season, all star games, playoffs and world series. I always rooted against him, but how have his numbers been overlooked? >>
oh. i didnt know there was a "wrong answer".
WTB: PSA 1 - PSA 3 Centered, High Eye Appeal 1950's Mantle
what every year. Weak sauce.
W
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
<< <i>The Hall is so weak these days it isn't even worth arguing. I remember the old days when certain years no one got it, now its like someone has to get in no matter
what every year. Weak sauce. >>
Interestingly, last century it was the Veteran's Committee making virtually every single weak choice -- and they did it often. Now this century the Veteran's Committee isn't doing that anymore, but the writers are doing it most years
It's become the hall of very good. If you have to ask if someone is a HOFer they aren't.
Always looking for Topps Salesman Samples, pre '51 unopened packs, E90-2, E91a, N690 Kalamazoo Bats, and T204 Square Frame Ramly's
<< <i>I could name 15 that shouldn't be there.
It's become the hall of very good. If you have to ask if someone is a HOFer they aren't. >>
Anthony ... and I will guess many of those names are below:
1. Dave Bancroft
2. Jake Beckley
3. Jim Bunning
4. Morgan Bulkeley
5. Orlando Cepeda
6. Red Faber
7. Rick Farrell
8. Chick Hafey
9. Jesse Haines
10. Harry Hooper
11. Waite Hoyt
12. Travis Jackson
13. George Kell
14. George Kelly
15. Bowie Kuhn
16. Tony Lazzeri
17. Ted Lyons
18. Freddie Lindstrom
19. Effa Manley
20. Tommy McCarthy
21. Rube Marquard
22. Hal Newhouser
23. Tony Perez
24. Herb Pennock
25. Eppa Rixey
26. Anthony Griffins
27. Red Ruffing
28. Red Schoendienst
29-31. Joe Tinker, Johnny Evers, Frank Chance
32. Lloyd Waner
33. Vic Willis
34. Tom Yawkey
Doug
Liquidating my collection for the 3rd and final time. Time for others to enjoy what I have enjoyed over the last several decades. Money could be put to better use.
<< <i>
<< <i>I could name 15 that shouldn't be there.
It's become the hall of very good. If you have to ask if someone is a HOFer they aren't. >>
Anthony ... and I will guess many of those names are below:
1. Dave Bancroft
2. Jake Beckley
3. Jim Bunning
4. Morgan Bulkeley
5. Orlando Cepeda
6. Red Faber
7. Rick Farrell
8. Chick Hafey
9. Jesse Haines
10. Harry Hooper
11. Waite Hoyt
12. Travis Jackson
13. George Kell
14. George Kelly
15. Bowie Kuhn
16. Tony Lazzeri
17. Ted Lyons
18. Freddie Lindstrom
19. Effa Manley
20. Tommy McCarthy
21. Rube Marquard
22. Hal Newhouser
23. Tony Perez
24. Herb Pennock
25. Eppa Rixey
26. Anthony Griffins
27. Red Ruffing
28. Red Schoendienst
29-31. Joe Tinker, Johnny Evers, Frank Chance
32. Lloyd Waner
33. Vic Willis
34. Tom Yawkey >>
You forgot Jim Rice..
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
Sweet dreams, comrade.
She does not belong in the Hall of Fame. She belongs in the Hall of SUPER AWESOME HAPPY FUN TIMES. Her contributions to baseball are unparalleled by those mere mortals who competed on the field.
<< <i>
<< <i>I could name 15 that shouldn't be there.
It's become the hall of very good. If you have to ask if someone is a HOFer they aren't. >>
Anthony ... and I will guess many of those names are below: >>
Am I correct that only three of those names were put in by the writers? If anything that shows they actually have maintained very high standards over almost 80 years
I could never argue against someone who joined the Marines at age 42 to fight against the enemy in war
He was an 8 time All Star, 3 time gold glove winner, 3 time World Champion, hit for the cycle, hit 4 HR's in one game, had the 2nd most HR's & RBI's in the decade. (1950's)
I think a big factor of him not getting in is there are so many Brooklyn Dodgers in the Hall from that team!
As far as players in the Hall not deserving to be there, I think the answer is ZERO!
There are many things that can make a player a great player. Offensive output (not just HR & RBI leaders, also high average hitters, run producers as in stolen bases & OBP), defensive output, longevity at a high level, leadership, specialist, untangeables... That is why you can not simply look at stats, as so many people try to compare!
For example, let's take a couple of players on the list. Tony Perez had desent stats, a 7 time All Star, but more importantly, was a clutch RBI man. So much, that when the Reds let him go in 1977, the Big Red Machine never got back to the World Series. They became the Little Red Machine!
Jim Bunning was a 9 time All Star with 2 no-hitters, 1 being a perfect game. But Jim was also very consistant, never having his ERA reach above 3.89 for 16 years (from 1956 to 1969), & 14 years of double-digit wins.
That's just an example of 2, but if you take the time to read more about the player (or remember back for us oldies), I think you will find much more than just stats!
Don't waste your time and fees listing on ebay before getting in touch me by PM or at gregmo32@aol.com !
Don't waste your time and fees listing on ebay before getting in touch me by PM or at gregmo32@aol.com !
<< <i>As far as players in the Hall not deserving to be there, I think the answer is ZERO!
There are many things that can make a player a great player. Offensive output (not just HR & RBI leaders, also high average hitters, run producers as in stolen bases & OBP), defensive output, longevity at a high level, leadership, specialist, untangeables... That is why you can not simply look at stats, as so many people try to compare!
For example, let's take a couple of players on the list. Tony Perez had desent stats, a 7 time All Star, but more importantly, was a clutch RBI man. So much, that when the Reds let him go in 1977, the Big Red Machine never got back to the World Series. They became the Little Red Machine!
Jim Bunning was a 9 time All Star with 2 no-hitters, 1 being a perfect game. But Jim was also very consistant, never having his ERA reach above 3.89 for 16 years (from 1956 to 1969), & 14 years of double-digit wins.
That's just an example of 2, but if you take the time to read more about the player (or remember back for us oldies), I think you will find much more than just stats!
As I see it, being elected to the Hall is certainly subjective. There are no hard and fast numbers that a player must have for enshrinement as well there shouldn't be. Stats are influenced and often skewed by the other members of the team. A great hitter can be pitched around if the rest of the batters are weak or a poor bullpen costs a starter lots of victories, as examples. I believe when you get to the lesser players (not the Ruths, Cobbs, Wagners, Gehrigs etc. whose greatness are without question) you begin to look at other players like a Hodges or Maris or all the others named and legitimately ask why they are not in. Unfortunately, sometimes politics plays too big a part. Until someone can come up with a true system to rate players taking in all factors including the quality of the team(s) they played for the arguements for and against players being in the Hall of Fame will rage on. JMO
Doug
<< <i>I could name 15 that shouldn't be there.
It's become the hall of very good. If you have to ask if someone is a HOFer they aren't. >>
To your point, it's not called the Hall of Great, it's the Hall of FAME. And by that standard, Roger Maris should absolutely be in it.
I'd personally like to see Dale Murphy in the Hall as well but I know his numbers are borderline.
Join the Rookie stars on top PSA registry today:
1980-1989 Cello Packs - Rookies
Also Maris. Why not - His cards sell like a Hall of Famer. The man still holds the record as far as I'm concerned. Sure his last few years weren't the greatest (home run wise) but then again he did help lead his time to the World Series in his final 2 years. Sounds like an above average player to me.
With the exception of one great year, he was very average. The year before and the year after he hit 33 & 39 homeruns, never to hit in the 30's again. Those were the only 3 years he had 100 RBI's, never even being close again. He only played 12 years, had a lifetime average of .260 & never hit over .284 in a season!
Roger Maris is very famous for his 1961 season, as he should be. But one season does not place a player in the HOF! I beleive he was probably a very good person, and I like Maris, even though he was a Yankee, but deffinately not a HOF'er. IMO
Yr Age Team G AB R H 2B 3B HR GRSL RBI BB IBB SO SH SF HBP GIDP AVG OBP SLG
1957 23 Indians 116 358 61 84 9 5 14 1 51 60 5 79 3 2 1 6 .235 .344 .405
1958 24 Indians 51 182 26 41 5 1 9 0 27 17 2 33 0 3 0 0 .225 .287 .412
1958 24 Athletics 99 401 61 99 14 3 19 2 53 28 1 52 2 2 2 2 .247 .298 .439
1959 25 Athletics 122 433 69 118 21 7 16 1 72 58 5 53 0 4 3 4 .273 .359 .464
1960 26 Yankees 136 499 98 141 18 7 39 0 112 70 4 65 1 5 3 6 .283 .371 .581
1961 27 Yankees 161 590 132 159 16 4 61 0 141 94 0 67 0 7 7 16 .269 .372 .620
1962 28 Yankees 157 590 92 151 34 1 33 1 100 87 11 78 1 3 6 7 .256 .356 .485
1963 29 Yankees 90 312 53 84 14 1 23 0 53 35 3 40 1 1 2 2 .269 .346 .542
1964 30 Yankees 141 513 86 144 12 2 26 0 71 62 1 78 1 2 6 7 .281 .364 .464
1965 31 Yankees 46 155 22 37 7 0 8 0 27 29 1 29 1 1 0 4 .239 .357 .439
1966 32 Yankees 119 348 37 81 9 2 13 0 43 36 3 60 0 4 3 8 .233 .307 .382
1967 33 Cardinals 125 410 64 107 18 7 9 0 55 52 3 61 1 5 4 10 .261 .346 .405
1968 34 Cardinals 100 310 25 79 18 2 5 0 45 24 3 38 1 4 1 3 .255 .307 .374
Career G AB R H 2B 3B HR GRSL RBI BB IBB SO SH SF HBP GIDP AVG OBP SLG
12 Years 1,463 5,101 826 1,325 195 42 275 5 850 652 42 733 12 43 38 75 .260 .345 .476
<< <i>Doug -- that you have failed to mention Effa Manley has made me forever lose respect for you.
She does not belong in the Hall of Fame. She belongs in the Hall of SUPER AWESOME HAPPY FUN TIMES. Her contributions to baseball are unparalleled by those mere mortals who competed on the field. >>
C'mon Schmitty ... look again. She is #19 on the list!
Doug
Liquidating my collection for the 3rd and final time. Time for others to enjoy what I have enjoyed over the last several decades. Money could be put to better use.
OOPS! Sorry. Just noticed the original post stating last 50 years. With that being said, I agree on Dale Murphy and hope that some of the players that played in the 80's get more consideration now that we all know the numbers from the 90's and early 2000's are severely inflated.
www.questfortherookiecup.com
As far as who belongs that isn't in...nobody. They all have been vetted and re-vetted and the conclusion is always the same. NO.
Unless you are Ron Santo. Apparently after 30 or so tries he is now a Hall of Famer. What a joke that is.
<< <i>Why is it that the only people who don't think Puckett belongs are Don Mattingly fans? >>
Being a Mattingly Fan has nothing to do with me thinking that Puckett doesn't belong. I don't think Mattingly belongs either.
I know you asked for on field exploits, but the surgery named after him has kept many pitchers in baseball, most times throwing harder than before the pitcher's surgery.
<< <i>
<< <i>Why is it that the only people who don't think Puckett belongs are Don Mattingly fans? >>
Being a Mattingly Fan has nothing to do with me thinking that Puckett doesn't belong. I don't think Mattingly belongs either. >>
I am NOT a Yankees fan, but if you look at their stats, they are almost identical. If one is in, the other should be in. Or out.
Clearly, I am not alone in my thoughts
Even stranger to me, is that Puckett was elected on his first ballot. There are some INCREDIBLE players who were not first-ballot HOFers.
For what it's worth according to this site and filtering out existing HOFers and active players:
Batter: Piazza (or Biggio (I think Piazza was in the steroid suspicion group but don't entirely recall now)
Pitcher Jim McCormick (or for modern player Curt Schilling)
I respect your opinion although I highly disagree with it. You wrote "with the exception of one great year" - The man was also MVP in 1960. That was a great year. In 61, he had an AMAZING year. He hit more homeruns than Cal Ripken - why is he not exceptional? 2 Things - Cal wasn't overshadowed by Mickey Mantle and because Ripken played shortstop and Maris played outfield. Unfortunately if someone plays outfield, there only way to the HOF is by hitting homeruns. Nothing else matters. So its obvious the standards are set different depending on the position you play. Not only that but he also had 3 World Series Titles which doesnt hurt while Ripken doesn't own a single one. By no means - do not get confused either - I AM NOT saying Ripken doesn't belong but lets be real here - the HOF is simply a popularity contest. Roger should be in.
Maris's 1961 year alone simply should have gotten him in.
*Edit - I love Ripken but only reason he was brought up was because of his home runs which he never did more than 30 either except for one year (1991)
Edit again - I was just corrected. He does have one - 1983.
TheClockworkAngelCollection
<< <i>the HOF is simply a popularity contest. Roger should be in. >>
If the HOF was strictly a popularity contest Maris would be in. I'm in the group that doesn't think he should be in (or even close for that matter). 2 great seasons out of 12 does not a HOF career make.
My small collection
Want List:
'61 Topps Roy Campanella in PSA 5-7
Cardinal T206 cards
Adam Wainwright GU Jersey
<< <i>The Hall is so weak these days it isn't even worth arguing. I remember the old days when certain years no one got it, now its like someone has to get in no matter
what every year. Weak sauce.
W >>
Someone's gotten in every since 1961. 1960 was the last time no one got in.
I agree with your general point that too many guys get in, however.
Tabe
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Why is it that the only people who don't think Puckett belongs are Don Mattingly fans? >>
Being a Mattingly Fan has nothing to do with me thinking that Puckett doesn't belong. I don't think Mattingly belongs either. >>
I am NOT a Yankees fan, but if you look at their stats, they are almost identical. If one is in, the other should be in. Or out.
Clearly, I am not alone in my thoughts
Even stranger to me, is that Puckett was elected on his first ballot. There are some INCREDIBLE players who were not first-ballot HOFers. >>
Your analysis ignores their positions. The hitting standards at CF are different than those at 1B. It also helps Puckett's case that he was never an average player while Mattingly was average - at best - as an offensive player his last 6 seasons. Puckett was still elite the day he retired. 10+ seasons as an elite player > 5 seasons as an elite + 6 seasons of below-average.
Tabe
<< <i>Sorry, my pick would be Garvey. Consistent all star for over 10+ years and performed very highly on all stages: regular season, all star games, playoffs and world series. I always rooted against him, but how have his numbers been overlooked? >>
The case against Garvey is an easy one - not enough power numbers. 272 HRs at first base doesn't get you in the HOF.
Tabe