If we are deducting HOF points for longevity and adding HOF points by triple crown category performance then, by your theory, Dave Kingman should be in the HOF. Top 3 in HR's 7 times, led the league twice. Retired at the age of 35 with 442 HR's. After averaging 33 HR's/season his last 3 years, if he played for 5 more years, he is quite possibly a 600 career HR guy and a lock.
Maranville, Tinker and Others are Questionable at Best Bill Mazeroski is not alone. One must question the credentials of Rabbit Maranville (.258, 631 career errors, and a lifetime .956 fielding average), Joe Tinker (.262, 648 career errors, and a lifetime .938 fielding average).
Baseball Reference lists batters similar to Mazeroski. Included are Kansas City second baseman Frank White, Cincinnati shortstop Leo Cardenas, Los Angeles shortstop Bill Russell, and Oakland and Pittsburgh second baseman Phil Garner. All were fine players, but none has been even remotely considered for election to the Hall of Fame.
I found the above statement on another site. Iam voting for my boy Garner to get in
i wouldn't kick anyone out? why, unless you have something personal against that person? I could think of a few that don't seem to have stats that make them worthy, but it is a club, and character does play a role...so not sure i would kick anyone out...
You left out probably the most borderline case of that era in Kirby Puckett. What makes him more qualified than Molitor, Winfield, Fisk, Murray, Stargell or Yount in your opinion.? All star appearances?
<< <i>If he wants to rely on MVP voting that is where Marichal has his strenght.
Also, He did have a Cy Young vote in 1971.
For most of his career only 1 CY Young award was given out and a guy named Koufax would get it. >>
Not true. Excluding the last 2 seasons of his career where Marichal was basically finished, he played 14 years - 7 in the 1 Cy Young era and 7 in the 2 Cy Young era. So, no majority either way
That said, he really had no chance to win one. After Koufax retired, Marichal's best year was 1968 - and no one was winning a Cy Young that year other than Bob Gibson. Can you imagine a guy going 26-9 with a 2.43 ERA and getting ABSOLUTELY NO CONSIDERATION for the Cy Young - and having that be the CORRECT assessment? Unreal.
<< <i>You left out probably the most borderline case of that era in Kirby Puckett. What makes him more qualified than Molitor, Winfield, Fisk, Murray, Stargell or Yount in your opinion.? All star appearances? >>
Mattingly's stats are very, very similar to Kirby's. Both should be out or both should be in. I would opt for the latter, but there is no reason for only one of them to be enshrined.
<< <i>Carlton Fisk was the absolute BEST catcher in the American League practically his entire career! >>
I gotta take issue with this. When he was healthy, from 1980 through half of 1986, Lance Parrish was the best catcher in the AL. 3 Gold Gloves (Fisk only won one), 6 Silver Slugger awards (Fisk won 3), and a key component of a World Series champ.
All of those cornerstone 80s Tigers deserve some HOF play- Whitaker and Trammell together and Parrish and Morris by themselves. There was a 5-7 year period where any manager in the league would choose Jack Morris over any other pitcher to start game 7 of the World Series.
<< <i>All of those cornerstone 80s Tigers deserve some HOF play- Whitaker and Trammell together and Parrish and Morris by themselves. There was a 5-7 year period where any manager in the league would choose Jack Morris over any other pitcher to start game 7 of the World Series. >>
While we're on the Tigers note, you can add Ivan Rodriguez to your locks for the Hall. don't even need to quote the stats....
< If he wants to rely on MVP voting that is where Marichal has his strenght.
Also, He did have a Cy Young vote in 1971.
For most of his career only 1 CY Young award was given out and a guy named Koufax would get it. >>
Not true. Excluding the last 2 seasons of his career where Marichal was basically finished, he played 14 years - 7 in the 1 Cy Young era and 7 in the 2 Cy Young era. So, no majority either way
That said, he really had no chance to win one. After Koufax retired, Marichal's best year was 1968 - and no one was winning a Cy Young that year other than Bob Gibson. Can you imagine a guy going 26-9 with a 2.43 ERA and getting ABSOLUTELY NO CONSIDERATION for the Cy Young - and having that be the CORRECT assessment? Unreal.
Marchial belongs, IMHO.
Tabe
Not true? Isn't that basically what I said? I said he belongs.
While Puckett and Mattinglys stats are similar there are 3 notable differences that probaly gave Puckett the edge in the minds of the voters. 2 World Series ring and a career that was ended early due to medical reasons.(glaucoma)
Neither reason should give weight over the stats, but being humans the writers will tend to use that to sway a vote.
Frankly, I don't think that you should really have to go back and have to microscopically analyze any player's stats to "know" if he was great or not, and should be in the Hall of Fame. For example obviously (to me anyway) Nolan Ryan was a great pitcher and should be in the Hall of Fame. In no way, shape or form do I think of Bill Mazeroski as being a great player, In fact I barely think of him as being an excellent player.
Just because a player was the best at his position for a number of years does not mean he should be in the Hall of Fame. If all players at a given position weren't that good over a period of time, the best of those players should not be in the Hall of Fame. The "best at his position" argument for entry into the Hall of Fame in my opinion should not be "automatic" grounds for entry.
<< <i>While Puckett and Mattinglys stats are similar there are 3 notable differences that probaly gave Puckett the edge in the minds of the voters. 2 World Series ring and a career that was ended early due to medical reasons.(glaucoma)
Neither reason should give weight over the stats, but being humans the writers will tend to use that to sway a vote. >>
2 world series rings is a stat and should be weighed, but I believe the main reason is character, which also should be weighed, and was ultimately weight that tipped the scale. Puckett's enthusiasm was unparalleled.
Rich Dauer better than Mazeroski as a fielder? I'll have what you're smoking.
I would readily agree that Mazeroski's offensive statistics are marginal, but he is arguably one of the greatest defensive 2B in history. Bill James supports this for any statheads out there with Win Shares.
Let's look at Dauer's statistics in Baseball Reference - RFg (Range Factor by games played) and RF9 (Range Factor per 9 innings) below league average. Never won a Gold Glove.
Mazeroski well above league average for both. 8 gold gloves.
Collecting all things Pittsburgh.
Completed my Clemente Basic Registry (2007 - 2014)!
Positive transactions with oakesy25,jasoneggert,swartz1,MBMiller25,gregm13,kid4hof03,HoopGuru33,Reese3333,BPorter26,Davemri
As I said in my original post (and which some respondents seem not to have read), I think the HOF should be for the truly great. So being pretty good over a long period of time doesn't cut it for me. That's why I put more weight in stats that indicate some sort of dominance (like AS appearances, MVP votes, and Triple Crown titles) and less weight on stats that are achieveable simply by being good, but not great, for a long period of time (like 3000 hits, 500 HR, 3000 K, 300 W). You've got to be unquestionably great to be in my HOF.
Most of the players who people have taken issue with were never great players. They were pretty good for a long period of time, but they were never great. After all, if you never, even for one single season, were considered to be the best player in your league (i.e. won the MVP/Cy Young), how can you claim to be among the greatest ever? While I can probably make an exception for a guy like Eddie Murray, who finished in the top five of MVP voting six times but never won, I've got little tolerance for guys who were considered to be one of the three best players in their league only once or twice over a 15-20 year career, especially if they only won a couple of hitting/pitching titles.
Some people have criticized my lack of support for Carlton Fisk, but let's face it...would either he (or Gary Carter for that matter), be in the HOF if they weren't catchers? And as someone else pointed out, Fisk wasn't even the best catcher in the AL for much of his career. Munson was certainly as good as him if not better up until his death, and Lance Parrish was as good, if not better, than him during the latter part of his career.
And while a strong case can be made for Marichal, neither he nor Drysdale are people I think of as being one of the all-time greats. Very, very good....yes. But one of the greatest ever, no.
For players who were inducted after 1970 and currently active players over 30, my HOF is a pretty small one. For pitchers, it's Koufax, Gibson, Spahn, Seaver, Ryan, Carlton, Palmer, Clemens, Randy Johnson, Pedro Martinez, and Greg Maddux.
None of the defensive specialists make it in my book (B.Robinson, Aparicio, Ozzie, Mazeroski, Alomar, Vizquel, I.Rodriguez), because I think just being good defensively is not enough (there are plenty of players who were great both defensively AND offensively).
Anyway...have at it....I'm sure that plenty of people will disagree with me, which is great (I'm trying to stimulate debate, after all) and I'll get another few people calling me an idiot (not great!)....
Alomar has one of the best baseball minds to ever play the game and his offensive stats are every bit as good as Ryno's. He also made 12 all star games in a row and was the best all around player on two World Series winning teams. He was far from a defensive specialist. I'm not sure how he would not be considered a lock by anyone.
You have Duke Snider in there and not Willie Stargell or Eddie Murray. Would you like to explain this?
Duke Snider in 18 years had 407 HR, no MVPs (he was in the top 5 3 times), and "only" 8 All-Star games. He did hit for a better average than Stargell.
Willie Stargell in 21 years (if you count 1962, 1977, 1981, and 1982 where he had a total of 350 AB combined) had 475HR, 1 shared MVP and 3 other seasons which he was in the top 3, and one less All-Star game than Snider. Willie Stargell with 296 HR along with Reggie Jackson (292) were considered the most feared sluggers of the 1970s.
Eddie Murray in 21 years had 504 HR, no MVPs but was in the Top 5 5 times and 6th another, and 8 All-Star games as well.
Collecting all things Pittsburgh.
Completed my Clemente Basic Registry (2007 - 2014)!
Positive transactions with oakesy25,jasoneggert,swartz1,MBMiller25,gregm13,kid4hof03,HoopGuru33,Reese3333,BPorter26,Davemri
<< <i>You left out probably the most borderline case of that era in Kirby Puckett. What makes him more qualified than Molitor, Winfield, Fisk, Murray, Stargell or Yount in your opinion.? All star appearances? >>
I will say I was absoultely shocked he got in on the first ballot.
<<All of those cornerstone 80s Tigers deserve some HOF play- Whitaker and Trammell together and Parrish and Morris by themselves. There was a 5-7 year period where any manager in the league would choose Jack Morris over any other pitcher to start game 7 of the World Series. >>
Lee, you may be the first non-Detroiter I've ever heard say this. Unless of course you are a Detroiter. Then never mind.
Jack Morris was like Terry Bradshaw and Reggie Jackson - they were very good in the regular season, but they would take it to a higher level in the playoffs.
Collecting all things Pittsburgh.
Completed my Clemente Basic Registry (2007 - 2014)!
Positive transactions with oakesy25,jasoneggert,swartz1,MBMiller25,gregm13,kid4hof03,HoopGuru33,Reese3333,BPorter26,Davemri
If you compare Alan Trammell's career numbers to Joe Morgan IMO they are slightly better. His batting average is 14 points higher for his career. Morgan was a better than average player who benefited from his longevity and the team/players that he played with. My comment wasn't a knock on Joe Morgan just an indication that more players with comparable or better stats should be more seriously considered for the HOF.
detroit- I'm not a Tiger fan but I enjoyedwatching those teams. I got to see them at a lot of O's games in the 80s. Those Tigers teams were unstoppable at times and Morris, Trammell, Whitaker and Parrish all had outstanding prolonged careers. Morris even extended his success to the Blue Jays, so being the ace of two championship teams and putting up the career stats he did, I'm not sure why he doesn't get more HOF support. Trammell and Whitaker are the best 2B/SS combo in the history of the game so I think they should go in together. Plus they were in Magnum P.I. and gave Tom Selleck free Tigers tickets, so that ices it for me. Parrish is fringe but should get more votes.
I love how 112358134965109263232 says players that only achieved their numbers because of longevity do not belong but makes a list of his locks and half achieved what they did by longevity...or roids...allegedly.
Heh, that's 2 more HOF years more than what Anderson had.
Maris is still the un-juiced single-season home run king.
It's not hall worthy, but he still gets his page in baseball history while Anderson is just a name on a list titled "Players to hit 50 or more Home Runs in a Season" or "Fluke Seasons."
Someone mentioned Ivan Rodriquez and Roberto Alomar. Anyone who spits in someone's face is a classless b**ch!! And Rodriquez was a part of the Texas Ranger's steriod club along with Palmeiro, and Juan Gonzales. So as far as I'm concerned Rodriquez's offensive stats are irrelevant--I hope neither makes it!!!
"You tell 'em I'm coming...and hell's coming with me"--Wyatt Earp
Comments
>
Successful transactions on the BST boards with rtimmer, coincoins, gerard, tincup, tjm965, MMR, mission16, dirtygoldman, AUandAG, deadmunny, thedutymon, leadoff4, Kid4HOF03, BRI2327, colebear, mcholke, rpcolettrane, rockdjrw, publius, quik, kalinefan, Allen, JackWESQ, CON40, Griffeyfan2430, blue227, Tiggs2012, ndleo, CDsNuts, ve3rules, doh, MurphDawg, tennessebanker, and gene1978.
Bill Mazeroski is not alone. One must question the credentials of Rabbit Maranville (.258, 631 career errors, and a lifetime .956 fielding average), Joe Tinker (.262, 648 career errors, and a lifetime .938 fielding average).
Baseball Reference lists batters similar to Mazeroski. Included are Kansas City second baseman Frank White, Cincinnati shortstop Leo Cardenas, Los Angeles shortstop Bill Russell, and Oakland and Pittsburgh second baseman Phil Garner. All were fine players, but none has been even remotely considered for election to the Hall of Fame.
I found the above statement on another site. Iam voting for my boy Garner to get in
Sweet Morsels Toffee and Chocolates
I could think of a few that don't seem to have stats that make them worthy, but it is a club, and character does play a role...so not sure i would kick anyone out...
<< <i>If he wants to rely on MVP voting that is where Marichal has his strenght.
Also, He did have a Cy Young vote in 1971.
For most of his career only 1 CY Young award was given out and a guy named Koufax would get it. >>
Not true. Excluding the last 2 seasons of his career where Marichal was basically finished, he played 14 years - 7 in the 1 Cy Young era and 7 in the 2 Cy Young era. So, no majority either way
That said, he really had no chance to win one. After Koufax retired, Marichal's best year was 1968 - and no one was winning a Cy Young that year other than Bob Gibson. Can you imagine a guy going 26-9 with a 2.43 ERA and getting ABSOLUTELY NO CONSIDERATION for the Cy Young - and having that be the CORRECT assessment? Unreal.
Marchial belongs, IMHO.
Tabe
<< <i>You left out probably the most borderline case of that era in Kirby Puckett. What makes him more qualified than Molitor, Winfield, Fisk, Murray, Stargell or Yount in your opinion.? All star appearances? >>
Mattingly's stats are very, very similar to Kirby's. Both should be out or both should be in. I would opt for the latter, but there is no reason for only one of them to be enshrined.
<< <i>Carlton Fisk was the absolute BEST catcher in the American League practically his entire career! >>
I gotta take issue with this. When he was healthy, from 1980 through half of 1986, Lance Parrish was the best catcher in the AL. 3 Gold Gloves (Fisk only won one), 6 Silver Slugger awards (Fisk won 3), and a key component of a World Series champ.
Fisk has the longevity. But Parrish was better.
Tabe
<< <i>All of those cornerstone 80s Tigers deserve some HOF play- Whitaker and Trammell together and Parrish and Morris by themselves. There was a 5-7 year period where any manager in the league would choose Jack Morris over any other pitcher to start game 7 of the World Series. >>
While we're on the Tigers note, you can add Ivan Rodriguez to your locks for the Hall. don't even need to quote the stats....
Also, He did have a Cy Young vote in 1971.
For most of his career only 1 CY Young award was given out and a guy named Koufax would get it. >>
Not true. Excluding the last 2 seasons of his career where Marichal was basically finished, he played 14 years - 7 in the 1 Cy Young era and 7 in the 2 Cy Young era. So, no majority either way
That said, he really had no chance to win one. After Koufax retired, Marichal's best year was 1968 - and no one was winning a Cy Young that year other than Bob Gibson. Can you imagine a guy going 26-9 with a 2.43 ERA and getting ABSOLUTELY NO CONSIDERATION for the Cy Young - and having that be the CORRECT assessment? Unreal.
Marchial belongs, IMHO.
Tabe
Not true? Isn't that basically what I said? I said he belongs.
Steve
Neither reason should give weight over the stats, but being humans the writers will tend to use that to sway a vote.
Just because a player was the best at his position for a number of years does not mean he should be in the Hall of Fame. If all players at a given position weren't that good over a period of time, the best of those players should not be in the Hall of Fame. The "best at his position" argument for entry into the Hall of Fame in my opinion should not be "automatic" grounds for entry.
<< <i>While Puckett and Mattinglys stats are similar there are 3 notable differences that probaly gave Puckett the edge in the minds of the voters. 2 World Series ring and a career that was ended early due to medical reasons.(glaucoma)
Neither reason should give weight over the stats, but being humans the writers will tend to use that to sway a vote. >>
2 world series rings is a stat and should be weighed, but I believe the main reason is character, which also should be weighed, and was ultimately
weight that tipped the scale. Puckett's enthusiasm was unparalleled.
<< <i>I do not recall ever reading any reports about Mattingly beating his wife. Puckett on the other hand..... >>
Well, there you have it...you have to beat your wife to get in...
Lou
I would readily agree that Mazeroski's offensive statistics are marginal, but he is arguably one of the greatest defensive 2B in history. Bill James supports this for any statheads out there with Win Shares.
Let's look at Dauer's statistics in Baseball Reference - RFg (Range Factor by games played) and RF9 (Range Factor per 9 innings) below league average. Never won a Gold Glove.
Mazeroski well above league average for both. 8 gold gloves.
Completed my Clemente Basic Registry (2007 - 2014)!
Positive transactions with oakesy25,jasoneggert,swartz1,MBMiller25,gregm13,kid4hof03,HoopGuru33,Reese3333,BPorter26,Davemri
<< <i>I'm going to go beat my wife to see if they will let me in. Wait, do I need to beat Puckett's wife? >>
Actually he waited until after he was enshrined to beat his wife...he did it to make a fool out of the writers association.
<< <i>Fielding is not defense. >>
The BBWAA, active and former baseball players, and baseball executives do not agree with you.
WTB: 2001 Leaf Rookies & Stars Longevity: Ryan Jensen #/25
Glad to see I've stirred up some debate!
As I said in my original post (and which some respondents seem not to have read), I think the HOF should be for the truly great. So being pretty good over a long period of time doesn't cut it for me. That's why I put more weight in stats that indicate some sort of dominance (like AS appearances, MVP votes, and Triple Crown titles) and less weight on stats that are achieveable simply by being good, but not great, for a long period of time (like 3000 hits, 500 HR, 3000 K, 300 W). You've got to be unquestionably great to be in my HOF.
Most of the players who people have taken issue with were never great players. They were pretty good for a long period of time, but they were never great. After all, if you never, even for one single season, were considered to be the best player in your league (i.e. won the MVP/Cy Young), how can you claim to be among the greatest ever? While I can probably make an exception for a guy like Eddie Murray, who finished in the top five of MVP voting six times but never won, I've got little tolerance for guys who were considered to be one of the three best players in their league only once or twice over a 15-20 year career, especially if they only won a couple of hitting/pitching titles.
Some people have criticized my lack of support for Carlton Fisk, but let's face it...would either he (or Gary Carter for that matter), be in the HOF if they weren't catchers? And as someone else pointed out, Fisk wasn't even the best catcher in the AL for much of his career. Munson was certainly as good as him if not better up until his death, and Lance Parrish was as good, if not better, than him during the latter part of his career.
And while a strong case can be made for Marichal, neither he nor Drysdale are people I think of as being one of the all-time greats. Very, very good....yes. But one of the greatest ever, no.
For players who were inducted after 1970 and currently active players over 30, my HOF is a pretty small one. For pitchers, it's Koufax, Gibson, Spahn, Seaver, Ryan, Carlton, Palmer, Clemens, Randy Johnson, Pedro Martinez, and Greg Maddux.
For hitters, it's Mays, Aaron, Clemente, Mantle, Snider, F.Robinson, Killebrew, Kaline, Mathews, Banks, Berra, Bench, Brett, Schmidt, Yaz, Gwynn, Rose, Ripken, Carew, Sandberg, Boggs, Brock, R.Henderson, Bonds, A.Rod, Griffey, Manny Ramirez, and Piazza.
None of the defensive specialists make it in my book (B.Robinson, Aparicio, Ozzie, Mazeroski, Alomar, Vizquel, I.Rodriguez), because I think just being good defensively is not enough (there are plenty of players who were great both defensively AND offensively).
Anyway...have at it....I'm sure that plenty of people will disagree with me, which is great (I'm trying to stimulate debate, after all) and I'll get another few people calling me an idiot (not great!)....
Duke Snider in 18 years had 407 HR, no MVPs (he was in the top 5 3 times), and "only" 8 All-Star games. He did hit for a better average than Stargell.
Willie Stargell in 21 years (if you count 1962, 1977, 1981, and 1982 where he had a total of 350 AB combined) had 475HR, 1 shared MVP and 3 other seasons which he was in the top 3, and one less All-Star game than Snider. Willie Stargell with 296 HR along with Reggie Jackson (292) were considered the most feared sluggers of the 1970s.
Eddie Murray in 21 years had 504 HR, no MVPs but was in the Top 5 5 times and 6th another, and 8 All-Star games as well.
Completed my Clemente Basic Registry (2007 - 2014)!
Positive transactions with oakesy25,jasoneggert,swartz1,MBMiller25,gregm13,kid4hof03,HoopGuru33,Reese3333,BPorter26,Davemri
<< <i>You left out probably the most borderline case of that era in Kirby Puckett. What makes him more qualified than Molitor, Winfield, Fisk, Murray, Stargell or Yount in your opinion.? All star appearances? >>
I will say I was absoultely shocked he got in on the first ballot.
Dimes: 54S, 53P, 50P, 49S, 45D+S, 44S, 43D, 41S, 40D+S, 39D+S, 38D+S, 37D+S, 36S, 35D+S, all 16-34's
Quarters: 52S, 47S, 46S, 40S, 39S, 38S, 37D+S, 36D+S, 35D, 34D, 32D+S
74 Topps: 37,38,46,47,48,138,151,193,210,214,223,241,256,264,268,277,289,316,435,552,570,577,592,602,610,654,655
1997 Finest silver: 115, 135, 139, 145, 310
1995 Ultra Gold Medallion Sets: Golden Prospects, HR Kings, On-Base Leaders, Power Plus, RBI Kings, Rising Stars
<< <i>You have Duke Snider in there and not Willie Stargell or Eddie Murray. Would you like to explain this? >>
Yeah...
a) it's just my opnion
b) my analysis is far from perfect
c) I make mistakes....
Lee, you may be the first non-Detroiter I've ever heard say this. Unless of course you are a Detroiter. Then never mind.
Completed my Clemente Basic Registry (2007 - 2014)!
Positive transactions with oakesy25,jasoneggert,swartz1,MBMiller25,gregm13,kid4hof03,HoopGuru33,Reese3333,BPorter26,Davemri
bull -ish
j
If you compare Alan Trammell's career numbers to Joe Morgan IMO they are slightly better. His batting average is 14 points higher for his career. Morgan was a better than average player who benefited from his longevity and the team/players that he played with. My comment wasn't a knock on Joe Morgan just an indication that more players with comparable or better stats should be more seriously considered for the HOF.
But, I do want to chime in that Ozzie Smith being elected on his first ballott is an embarassment to everyone who waited to get in.
3 HOF years out of 12
<< <i>Maris was the Brady Anderson of the 60's.
3 HOF years out of 12 >>
Heh, that's 2 more HOF years more than what Anderson had.
Maris is still the un-juiced single-season home run king.
It's not hall worthy, but he still gets his page in baseball history while Anderson is just a name on a list titled "Players to hit 50 or more Home Runs in a Season" or "Fluke Seasons."
WTB: 2001 Leaf Rookies & Stars Longevity: Ryan Jensen #/25
I also think Trammel and Whitaker were the best infield combo in the past 30 years.
<< <i>....I also think Trammel and Whitaker were the best infield combo in the past 30 years. >>
Better than Gallego and Velarde?
what took Fergie Jenkins so long to get to the hall was he was busted for drugs. Jenkins deserves the Hall (like Rose and Shoeless Joe)
I say if Ozzie is in the Hall then we also need to induct Dave Concepcion (ok davey couldn't do a back flip what am I thinking).
I also say kick all the umpires out of the Hall I mean they never won in Batting title or anything else that comes to mind.
Dallas Cowboys
SuperBowl MVPs
Heisman Trophy Winers