Thomas is not known for his defense--and Aaron never dealt with publicity and a shortened 1994 year that ruined his chances of a back to back record breaking seasons in BA, HR, Walks, etc. ONe can not use the argument for Aaron that he played in the days of all the greats and therefore couldn't rack in many awards like MVP, ALL Star nom and so forth. You deal with what your dealt. Frank Thomas stood out above all others in his station during the 90s (okay, '91-'96). Aaron didn't have to worry abou pitchers watching tapes over and over to figure out exactly how to pitch to him. With that said, Aaron fans will have some good points--and we will go back and forth for a while...
Why does everyone keep bringing up Aaron? They're from completely different eras, comparison means almost nothing. In as much as we want to preserve the sanctity of the game and generations passed, the truth of the matter is, sports medicine and doctrine says that today's athletes would out perform that generation if transplanted...they have science in their corner...across all positions. For that reason you have to take the skill of individual and see what tools they were able to capitalize on.
I've never mentioned Aaron. My point is, Thomas was one of the best hitters the game has seen. Now imagine if he weren't built like a tightend and could actually run out the 1st base line. His numbers are insane and speak to his ability to lay the wood on the leather and place the ball extremely well...speed did nothing for him. Patience did...a skill set that on scouting reports Thomas is rated 99 out of 100.
I don't think the issue is the comparison of Aaron to Thomas, but rather the comparison of Thomas to any player of Aaron's caliber. Thomas is a great player, a HOFer, even, but to compare him to [;ayers like Aaron, Mays, Williams, etc. is ill-advised to begin with. The title of this thread in that regard is factually incorrect.
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>I don't think the issue is the comparison of Aaron to Thomas, but rather the comparison of Thomas to any player of Aaron's caliber. Thomas is a great player, a HOFer, even, but to compare him to [;ayers like Aaron, Mays, Williams, etc. is ill-advised to begin with. The title of this thread in that regard is factually incorrect. >>
When Thomas' generation is 20-30 years out, there will be similar arguements about the guys who are rookies now.
<< I don't think the issue is the comparison of Aaron to Thomas, but rather the comparison of Thomas to any player of Aaron's caliber. Thomas is a great player, a HOFer, even, but to compare him to [;ayers like Aaron, Mays, Williams, etc. is ill-advised to begin with. The title of this thread in that regard is factually incorrect. >>
When Thomas' generation is 20-30 years out, there will be similar arguements about the guys who are rookies now.
That may or may not be the case but it won't change the fact that Thomas is most certainly not on the level of players like Aaron, mays, Williams, etc. And to paraphrase SteveK, it's not even debatable.
BunchO, I know you're a huge thomas fan, and that obviously clouds your objectivity here, but surely you don't think that Thomas is as good as any of the players I mentioned? If so, it's no use even debating the issue here.
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.
It clouds my objectivity not. The truth of the matter is, Thomas was in the top of his generation. The Aarons, Mayses, Williamses were at the top of theirs. They have something in common and that's as far as the comparison can go.
I think nostalgia clouds the objectivity of those who are certain that the "best" are long gone and will never be surpassed. By that mind set, there hasn't been a "great" in some time.
It clouds my objectivity not. The truth of the matter is, Thomas was in the top of his generation. The Aarons, Mayses, Williamses were at the top of theirs. They have something in common and that's as far as the comparison can go.
I will agree with you to that extent, that these players were the best of their generations..unfortunately for Thomas, however, the power numbers of this generation are grossly inflated due to a varoety of reasons, and while the raw numbers may appear to be comparable at first blush, these other factors diminish those power numbers over the last 10-15 years or so..
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.
So the quality of hitters in the MLB has fallen so much that the statistical leaders of the later generations can't hold a candle to the skill level of generations prior? And since it's also being said that the game is no longer a pitching dominated sport, the quality of pitches these hitters have seen must be severely diminished as well.
That means any modern day hitter who hasn't performed significantly (immeasurably) above the old timers doesn't deserve a mention because he saw weak opponents and grossly inflated statistics. That also means there are no modern day players who deserve to be spoken in the same breath with these greats because no players have shown that kind of complete domination.
This kind of retrograde movement is disconcerting.
Even more, pitchers from generations past must have been machines to be able to outcompete modern day men of the position, throw more complete games, defy the human body with less injuries despite horrid sports medcine (while competing at such a godlike level for 9 innings)...but the mound. I forget the mound.
Anyway, it seems like an apples to oranges arguement to me. Either we as a species are creating individuals who are physically less skilled and who lack the intelligence to take advantage of advances in medicine and sports science, or there were a few generations of super humans in the middle of the last century.
BunchO, don't take my word for it...the proof is in the statistics, and as the old saying goes, statistics don't lie...just look at the top 25 all time home run leaders and you tell me if the last 20 years hasn't had an abnormal effect on the all time numbers...I'm not saying that the players of today are not great players...what I am saying though is that when you have inflated numbers dominating the all time career numbers like we've witnessed over the pat two decades, you have to be in total denial not to think that those numbers just aren't quite as special as they used to be...that's not bias, that's just reality..
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 think nostalgia clouds the objectivity of those who are certain that the "best" are long gone and will never be surpassed. By that mind set, there hasn't been a "great" in some time.>
So the quality of hitters in the MLB has fallen so much that the statistical leaders of the later generations can't hold a candle to the skill level of generations prior?
On the contrary, the numbers say otherwise, but how much stock are we to put in these numbers and these records that are being shattered today? Let's be honest here, in addition to the lowering of the mound, expansion and a pitching talent pool that has subsequently gotten worse than at any time in the history of the game, the "elephant" in the room is the use of PEDs, and unfairly or not, no player is immune from the skepticism that comes along with playing in this era. I'm not saying that Thomas is guilty of using PEDs, and if not, he deserves more credit than some of the players we've seen putting up crazy numbers year after year, but the cloud of suspicion is always going to be present, and achievments like 500 career home runs, for instance, just don't have the cache they used to have in years past. I can recall when 400 career homers was a huge milestone, now it seems almost ordinary, LOL...
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> So the quality of hitters in the MLB has fallen so much that the statistical leaders of the later generations can't hold a candle to the skill level of generations prior?
On the contrary, the numbers say otherwise, but how much stock are we to put in these numbers and these records that are being shattered today? Let's be honest here, in addition to the lowering of the mound, expansion and a pitching talent pool that has subsequently gotten worse than at any time in the history of the game, the "elephant" in the room is the use of PEDs, and unfairly or not, no player is immune from the skepticism that comes along with playing in this era. I'm not saying that Thomas is guilty of using PEDs, and if not, he deserves more credit than some of the players we've seen putting up crazy numbers year after year, but the cloud of suspicion is always going to be present, and achievments like 500 career home runs, for instance, just don't have the cache they used to have in years past. I can recall when 400 career homers was a huge milestone, now it seems almost ordinary, LOL... >>
I agree there is an elephant that taints the generation, obviously beyond repair in the eyes of most. While Frank may or may not have used PEDs, I think it is overly synical to think every recent member of the 500HR club has. While it may be hard or impossible to distinguish the "clean" members from the outcasts, there are clean athletes who may go unrecognized for being such, but did great things nonetheless.
I agree with Grote that the comparison of statistics of today to 20+ years ago shows a great disparity. It used to be 50 HR in a season or 500 in a career was a very rare feat. Since the early 90s, both became almost an annual occurance (meaning nearly every year another player or multiple players would join the 500 HR club). On the other hand, pitcher's stats had declined percipetously. The rarity of a sub 3.00 ERA doesn't necessarily mean the pitcher posting a 3.50 ERA today is worse than one posting a 2.50 ERA 30 years ago.
If I tried to compare objectively, I'd put Frank Thomas in the same category as Jim Rice or Dave Parker. They all had great careers and were the best player in the game for a 3-5 year period. That puts them on the boarderline of being HOF worthy. Jim Rice's long road to the hall proves this.
We will certainly have to agree to disagree. I understand your disenchantment, but the negatives of the game in the last 15 years can't over shadow the performance of every player.
Thomas is a 1st Ballot HOFer, without question. He will obtain at least 90% of the vote on his first go through.
It's only a shame that each of the "greats" from the various generations will never have the opportunity to put their respective skills to the challenge.
The arguments I've heard today are the arguments of a mentality stuck in the past. We need to get over it; the likelihood that we have yet to see the greatest baseball hitter (indeed, any position player) of all time is much greater than the likelihood that the "greatest" have long come and gone. In as much as there are factors that have changed the game of baseball and watered down its competition, there are just as many factors that are overlooked or are simply immeasurable that skew the spectrum towards modern baseball being a much more skilled game.
The inclusion of men of all race, nationality, and creed for one. The talent pool is much deeper because everyone is allowed to compete; in fact, talented individuals are sought and cultured. Jackie Robinson breaking into the league didn't mean everything was OK or the playing field was leveled. That took time.
The only thing that is measurable is a man's performance against that of his peers. Some dominate. Those who do are great.
<< <i> Thomas is a 1st Ballot HOFer, without question. He will obtain at least 90% of the vote on his first go through. >>
1494 Runs 2468 Hits 495 2B 521 HRs 1704 RBIs .301 BA .419 OBP .555 SLG 2-time AL MVP
With those numbers, I think Thomas has a good chance of being a first ballot HOFer. But 90%? No way in h-e-double hockey sticks. (And I will revive this thread in five (5) years).
<< <i>With those numbers, I think Thomas has a good chance of being a first ballot HOFer. But 90%? No way in h-e-double hockey sticks. (And I will revive this thread in five (5) years).
I always had a place in my heart for Frank Thomas, he was always one of the greats of MY generation. First Ballot Hall of Famer? Probably. 90% of the vote? Not likely. I'm guessing somewhere in the mid-80's. Nobody can argue with his stats though. His numbers are definitely up there with the all-time greats. I guess time will tell. A sure-bet Hall of Famer, non the less.
I understand that 90% is a lofty goal, but there is a movement among writers to appreciate the fact that Thomas was asking for PED testing a decade before it became mainstream in the game. They appreciate his desire to preserve the value of baseball history and his numbers we atop the game for a decade.
The combination of these factors is what I think gives him a sizeable percentage.
Frank Thomas is one of my favorites for sure! A friend and I use to go to Yankee Stadium to watch him play in the early 90's. I am sure he is first ballot material. I don't think 90% of the vote is out of the question. Who is going to be his competition? I am assuming Maddux and Biggio will get in the 2014 and unless Griffey,Glavine and Smoltz retire this year I don't see alot of competition unless I am missing someone?
"I just love how people try to "out-think the room" by totally leaving out of the conversation a right handed hitter who is the only person the history of baseball to hit over .300, 30 hr, & 100 RBI's in his first TWO SEASONS"
honestly, please. I would LOVE to see Mays, Aarron, Ruth and Williams with today's training and year round conditioning absolutely CRUSH todays 5 man, expansion pitching staffs.
Pujols is a GREAT player, but his career isnt over and I wont speak of someone in the same breath as true baseball legends.
Thomas was a phenomenal hitter, top 3 or 4 of this generation, but not in the top 5 all time righties. And ANYONE, who tested or tests positive for steroids is OFF the list, i give them no respect for their "accomplishments"
<< <i>With those numbers, I think Thomas has a good chance of being a first ballot HOFer. But 90%? No way in h-e-double hockey sticks. (And I will revive this thread in five (5) years).
/s/ JackWESQ >>
If you don't, I will. >>
Just bumping this thread because I said I would. We'll know in a week.
<< <i>I would say one of the best in the past 20 years. I would have to really look at figures to say "all-time". >>
Just to be clear, I'm not trying to debate his place all time, though I do believe him to be a top 10 righty based upon numbers; that said, I'm bumping because of my prediction in 2009 that Frank would receive at least a 90% vote on the 2014 ballot. Other suggest he's a fringe first ballot HOFer at best. I'm just doing what I said I would. We'll see.
I loved watching Thomas in the nineties and would've said one of the best all-time and "The Big Hurt" name fit. But he was also famous of diving out of the way of inside pitches and getting the call (The anti-Maddux). Once umps started calling them strikes, along with injuries, his production went down, especially his average. That's about the same time "The Big Skirt" nickname started.
Just to be clear, I'm not trying to debate his place all time, though I do believe him to be a top 10 righty based upon numbers; that said, I'm bumping because of my prediction in 2009 that Frank would receive at least a 90% vote on the 2014 ballot. Other suggest he's a fringe first ballot HOFer at best. I'm just doing what I said I would. We'll see. >>
He'a at 90% now.
Updated: Jan.2 - 6:00 ~ 101 Full Ballots ~ (17.8% of vote ~ based on last year)
100 - Maddux 97.0 - Glavine 90.0 - F. Thomas 80.2 - Biggio
If Frank Thomas isn't a first ballot HOFer then something is wrong... Anybody leaving him off the ballot obviously has an agenda or wasn't watching Baseball in the 90's or 2000's ...
I knew him quite well in the 90s, when he was in Chicago, and at the time he was having a hard time in his career and private life. He told me that he thought that he was better at football than baseball, but he banked on having a longer career as a baseball player. He was really humble, and a good guy. I remember thinking...wow, what kind of a football player could he have been. He is a very private and introverted person, but he has such a huge heart.
<< <i>I knew him quite well in the 90s, when he was in Chicago, and at the time he was having a hard time in his career and private life. He told me that he thought that he was better at football than baseball, but he banked on having a longer career as a baseball player. He was really humble, and a good guy. I remember thinking...wow, what kind of a football player could he have been. He is a very private and introverted person, but he has such a huge heart. >>
I think anyone who lives through what he experience as a child with his sister is forever changed by it; empathy and compassion are givens. The media vilified him, but if you talk to anyone with first-hand accounts, they always talk about how genuine and sincere he is. Thanks for sharing.
<< <i>Just to be clear, I'm not trying to debate his place all time, though I do believe him to be a top 10 righty based upon numbers; that said, I'm bumping because of my prediction in 2009 that Frank would receive at least a 90% vote on the 2014 ballot. Other suggest he's a fringe first ballot HOFer at best. I'm just doing what I said I would. We'll see.
He'a at 90% now.
Updated: Jan.2 - 6:00 ~ 101 Full Ballots ~ (17.8% of vote ~ based on last year)
100 - Maddux 97.0 - Glavine 90.0 - F. Thomas 80.2 - Biggio >>
Where can you find out the current % vote?
Thanks,
David (LD_Ferg)
1985 Topps Football (starting in psa 8) - #9 - started 05/21/06
This is current voting numbers and vote % (courtesy of Stephen--galaxy27--who had previously posted it)
Updated: Jan.3 - 7:10 ~ 112 Full Ballots ~ (19.7% of vote ~ based on last year)
100 - Maddux 97.3 - Glavine 90.2 - F. Thomas 81.3 - Biggio ——————————— 73.2 - Piazza 66.1 - Bagwell 61.6 - Jack (The Jack) Morris 57.1 - Raines 45.5 - Bonds 44.6 - Clemens 39.3 - Schilling 33.0 - Mussina 24.0 - Trammell 21.4 - E. Martinez 18.8 - L. Smith 14.3 - McGriff 13.4 - Kent 10.7 - L. Walker 10.7 - McGwire 8.0 - S. Sosa 7.1 - R. Palmeiro ——————————— 4.5 - Mattingly 0.9 - P. Rose (Write-In)
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.
would like to Piazza get over that 75% threshold. It's ridiculous he wasn't first ballot anyway. These guys with the votes though can be petty, stupid, ignorant and other things I can't type here so maybe it's not a huge shock that arguably the greatest hitting catcher of all time may miss the HOF on his first two ballots.
Cabrera's best eight year run in OPS+ is 161. Thomas best is 182
Of course, Cabrera still has some good years left, however, even if he repeats his last four years, he still won't match Thomas's best prime run. Cabrerra's last four years has been OPS+ of 177. FOur more of those and he still is at 177 for his best run....still short of Thomas.
Yeah, he won the triple crown, a nice 'novelty', as triple crown does not equate to 'better', and BA and RBI aren't exactly the best measures of a players ability.
So, yeah, for their career, depending how Cabrera ages, he could have a stronger career...but it looks like Thomas will still be the king of their prime years.
Comments
Genesis 1:1
<< <i>Frank Thomas was very good over a 5-6 year period. Hank Aaron was very good over a 15 year period. >>
Give me a break. From 1990 to 2000 he only fell bellow .300 once. Edited to say, and was MVP runner up in 2000 behind a juiced Giambi.
<< <i>
<< <i>Frank Thomas was very good over a 5-6 year period. Hank Aaron was very good over a 15 year period. >>
Give me a break. From 1990 to 2000 he only fell bellow .300 once. Edited to say, and was MVP runner up in 2000 behind a juiced Giambi. >>
1991 CWS 158 559 104 178 31 2 32 109 138 112 1 2 .318 .453 .553 1.006
1992 CWS 160 573 108 185 46 2 24 115 122 88 6 3 .323 .439 .536 .975
1993 CWS 153 549 106 174 36 0 41 128 112 54 4 2 .317 .426 .607 1.033
1994 CWS 113 399 106 141 34 1 38 101 109 61 2 3 .353 .487 .729 1.217
1995 CWS 145 493 102 152 27 0 40 111 136 74 3 2 .308 .454 .606 1.061
1996 CWS 141 527 110 184 26 0 40 134 109 70 1 1 .349 .459 .626 1.085
1997 CWS 146 530 110 184 35 0 35 125 109 69 1 1 .347 .456 .611 1.067
1998 CWS 160 585 109 155 35 2 29 109 110 93 7 0 .265 .381 .480 .861
1999 CWS 135 486 74 148 36 0 15 77 87 66 3 3 .305 .414 .471 .885
2000 CWS 159 582 115 191 44 0 43 143 112 94 1 3 .328 .436 .625 1.061
Nice career but nowhere near Hank Aaron territory.
I've never mentioned Aaron. My point is, Thomas was one of the best hitters the game has seen. Now imagine if he weren't built like a tightend and could actually run out the 1st base line. His numbers are insane and speak to his ability to lay the wood on the leather and place the ball extremely well...speed did nothing for him. Patience did...a skill set that on scouting reports Thomas is rated 99 out of 100.
He wasn't a power hitter, he got long base hits.
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>I don't think the issue is the comparison of Aaron to Thomas, but rather the comparison of Thomas to any player of Aaron's caliber. Thomas is a great player, a HOFer, even, but to compare him to [;ayers like Aaron, Mays, Williams, etc. is ill-advised to begin with. The title of this thread in that regard is factually incorrect. >>
When Thomas' generation is 20-30 years out, there will be similar arguements about the guys who are rookies now.
When Thomas' generation is 20-30 years out, there will be similar arguements about the guys who are rookies now.
That may or may not be the case but it won't change the fact that Thomas is most certainly not on the level of players like Aaron, mays, Williams, etc. And to paraphrase SteveK, it's not even debatable.
BunchO, I know you're a huge thomas fan, and that obviously clouds your objectivity here, but surely you don't think that Thomas is as good as any of the players I mentioned? If so, it's no use even debating the issue here.
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>
You might offend the Pujols wackos around here by your post. There are Pujols fans and then there are those that believe a canonization is in order.
Thomas was a very good player worthy of the HOF.
I think nostalgia clouds the objectivity of those who are certain that the "best" are long gone and will never be surpassed. By that mind set, there hasn't been a "great" in some time.
I will agree with you to that extent, that these players were the best of their generations..unfortunately for Thomas, however, the power numbers of this generation are grossly inflated due to a varoety of reasons, and while the raw numbers may appear to be comparable at first blush, these other factors diminish those power numbers over the last 10-15 years or so..
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.
That means any modern day hitter who hasn't performed significantly (immeasurably) above the old timers doesn't deserve a mention because he saw weak opponents and grossly inflated statistics. That also means there are no modern day players who deserve to be spoken in the same breath with these greats because no players have shown that kind of complete domination.
This kind of retrograde movement is disconcerting.
Even more, pitchers from generations past must have been machines to be able to outcompete modern day men of the position, throw more complete games, defy the human body with less injuries despite horrid sports medcine (while competing at such a godlike level for 9 innings)...but the mound. I forget the mound.
Anyway, it seems like an apples to oranges arguement to me. Either we as a species are creating individuals who are physically less skilled and who lack the intelligence to take advantage of advances in medicine and sports science, or there were a few generations of super humans in the middle of the last century.
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.
Amen.
Genesis 1:1
On the contrary, the numbers say otherwise, but how much stock are we to put in these numbers and these records that are being shattered today? Let's be honest here, in addition to the lowering of the mound, expansion and a pitching talent pool that has subsequently gotten worse than at any time in the history of the game, the "elephant" in the room is the use of PEDs, and unfairly or not, no player is immune from the skepticism that comes along with playing in this era. I'm not saying that Thomas is guilty of using PEDs, and if not, he deserves more credit than some of the players we've seen putting up crazy numbers year after year, but the cloud of suspicion is always going to be present, and achievments like 500 career home runs, for instance, just don't have the cache they used to have in years past. I can recall when 400 career homers was a huge milestone, now it seems almost ordinary, LOL...
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> So the quality of hitters in the MLB has fallen so much that the statistical leaders of the later generations can't hold a candle to the skill level of generations prior?
On the contrary, the numbers say otherwise, but how much stock are we to put in these numbers and these records that are being shattered today? Let's be honest here, in addition to the lowering of the mound, expansion and a pitching talent pool that has subsequently gotten worse than at any time in the history of the game, the "elephant" in the room is the use of PEDs, and unfairly or not, no player is immune from the skepticism that comes along with playing in this era. I'm not saying that Thomas is guilty of using PEDs, and if not, he deserves more credit than some of the players we've seen putting up crazy numbers year after year, but the cloud of suspicion is always going to be present, and achievments like 500 career home runs, for instance, just don't have the cache they used to have in years past. I can recall when 400 career homers was a huge milestone, now it seems almost ordinary, LOL... >>
I agree there is an elephant that taints the generation, obviously beyond repair in the eyes of most. While Frank may or may not have used PEDs, I think it is overly synical to think every recent member of the 500HR club has. While it may be hard or impossible to distinguish the "clean" members from the outcasts, there are clean athletes who may go unrecognized for being such, but did great things nonetheless.
If I tried to compare objectively, I'd put Frank Thomas in the same category as Jim Rice or Dave Parker. They all had great careers and were the best player in the game for a 3-5 year period. That puts them on the boarderline of being HOF worthy. Jim Rice's long road to the hall proves this.
Thomas is a 1st Ballot HOFer, without question. He will obtain at least 90% of the vote on his first go through.
It's only a shame that each of the "greats" from the various generations will never have the opportunity to put their respective skills to the challenge.
The arguments I've heard today are the arguments of a mentality stuck in the past. We need to get over it; the likelihood that we have yet to see the greatest baseball hitter (indeed, any position player) of all time is much greater than the likelihood that the "greatest" have long come and gone. In as much as there are factors that have changed the game of baseball and watered down its competition, there are just as many factors that are overlooked or are simply immeasurable that skew the spectrum towards modern baseball being a much more skilled game.
The inclusion of men of all race, nationality, and creed for one. The talent pool is much deeper because everyone is allowed to compete; in fact, talented individuals are sought and cultured. Jackie Robinson breaking into the league didn't mean everything was OK or the playing field was leveled. That took time.
The only thing that is measurable is a man's performance against that of his peers. Some dominate. Those who do are great.
Steve
<< <i>Mays was a 5 tool player, Thomas was not.
Steve >>
I don't disagree.
<< <i> Thomas is a 1st Ballot HOFer, without question. He will obtain at least 90% of the vote on his first go through. >>
1494 Runs
2468 Hits
495 2B
521 HRs
1704 RBIs
.301 BA
.419 OBP
.555 SLG
2-time AL MVP
With those numbers, I think Thomas has a good chance of being a first ballot HOFer. But 90%? No way in h-e-double hockey sticks. (And I will revive this thread in five (5) years).
/s/ JackWESQ
<< <i>With those numbers, I think Thomas has a good chance of being a first ballot HOFer. But 90%? No way in h-e-double hockey sticks. (And I will revive this thread in five (5) years).
/s/ JackWESQ >>
If you don't, I will.
The combination of these factors is what I think gives him a sizeable percentage.
I am sure he is first ballot material.
I don't think 90% of the vote is out of the question. Who is going to be his competition? I am assuming Maddux and
Biggio will get in the 2014 and unless Griffey,Glavine and Smoltz retire this year I don't see alot of competition unless I am
missing someone?
ON ITS WAY TO NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658
It is my strong opinion that baseball has seen several greats in the last 2 or 3 decades however.
And yes, I think Pujols is great because, barring injuries, there is no reason to think he won't maintain form for another 5 seasons or so.
honestly, please. I would LOVE to see Mays, Aarron, Ruth and Williams with today's training and year round conditioning absolutely CRUSH todays 5 man, expansion pitching staffs.
Pujols is a GREAT player, but his career isnt over and I wont speak of someone in the same breath as true baseball legends.
Thomas was a phenomenal hitter, top 3 or 4 of this generation, but not in the top 5 all time righties. And ANYONE, who tested or tests positive for steroids is OFF the list, i give them no respect for their "accomplishments"
<< <i>
<< <i>With those numbers, I think Thomas has a good chance of being a first ballot HOFer. But 90%? No way in h-e-double hockey sticks. (And I will revive this thread in five (5) years).
/s/ JackWESQ >>
If you don't, I will. >>
Just bumping this thread because I said I would. We'll know in a week.
<< <i>I would say one of the best in the past 20 years. I would have to really look at figures to say "all-time". >>
Just to be clear, I'm not trying to debate his place all time, though I do believe him to be a top 10 righty based upon numbers; that said, I'm bumping because of my prediction in 2009 that Frank would receive at least a 90% vote on the 2014 ballot. Other suggest he's a fringe first ballot HOFer at best. I'm just doing what I said I would. We'll see.
all-time and "The Big Hurt" name fit. But he was also famous of diving out of the
way of inside pitches and getting the call (The anti-Maddux). Once umps started
calling them strikes, along with injuries, his production went down, especially his
average. That's about the same time "The Big Skirt" nickname started.
P.S. I STILL love watching Ray run!!
Just to be clear, I'm not trying to debate his place all time, though I do believe him to be a top 10 righty based upon numbers; that said, I'm bumping because of my prediction in 2009 that Frank would receive at least a 90% vote on the 2014 ballot. Other suggest he's a fringe first ballot HOFer at best. I'm just doing what I said I would. We'll see. >>
He'a at 90% now.
Updated: Jan.2 - 6:00 ~ 101 Full Ballots ~ (17.8% of vote ~ based on last year)
100 - Maddux
97.0 - Glavine
90.0 - F. Thomas
80.2 - Biggio
obviously has an agenda or wasn't watching Baseball in the 90's or 2000's ...
ON ITS WAY TO NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658
<< <i>I knew him quite well in the 90s, when he was in Chicago, and at the time he was having a hard time in his career and private life. He told me that he thought that he was better at football than baseball, but he banked on having a longer career as a baseball player. He was really humble, and a good guy. I remember thinking...wow, what kind of a football player could he have been. He is a very private and introverted person, but he has such a huge heart. >>
I think anyone who lives through what he experience as a child with his sister is forever changed by it; empathy and compassion are givens. The media vilified him, but if you talk to anyone with first-hand accounts, they always talk about how genuine and sincere he is. Thanks for sharing.
<< <i>Just to be clear, I'm not trying to debate his place all time, though I do believe him to be a top 10 righty based upon numbers; that said, I'm bumping because of my prediction in 2009 that Frank would receive at least a 90% vote on the 2014 ballot. Other suggest he's a fringe first ballot HOFer at best. I'm just doing what I said I would. We'll see.
He'a at 90% now.
Updated: Jan.2 - 6:00 ~ 101 Full Ballots ~ (17.8% of vote ~ based on last year)
100 - Maddux
97.0 - Glavine
90.0 - F. Thomas
80.2 - Biggio >>
Where can you find out the current % vote?
Thanks,
David (LD_Ferg)
1985 Topps Football (starting in psa 8) - #9 - started 05/21/06
Thomas's best eight year run from 1990-1997, he had an OPS+ of 182.
Pujols's best eight year run, he had an OPS+ of 177.
Keep in mind that three of those years for Thomas was in the pre live ball era(where it was just a tad harder to separate from the pack with OPS+)
Currently, Pujols has a lifetime OPS+ of 165, and Thomas 156.
However, through the age of 33(where Pujols is at now), Thomas was sitting at 168!
Looking how Pujols is declining rapidly, if he plays another seven years to age 40 like Thomas did, he probably will end up with a lower rate.
Updated: Jan.3 - 7:10 ~ 112 Full Ballots ~ (19.7% of vote ~ based on last year)
100 - Maddux
97.3 - Glavine
90.2 - F. Thomas
81.3 - Biggio
———————————
73.2 - Piazza
66.1 - Bagwell
61.6 - Jack (The Jack) Morris
57.1 - Raines
45.5 - Bonds
44.6 - Clemens
39.3 - Schilling
33.0 - Mussina
24.0 - Trammell
21.4 - E. Martinez
18.8 - L. Smith
14.3 - McGriff
13.4 - Kent
10.7 - L. Walker
10.7 - McGwire
8.0 - S. Sosa
7.1 - R. Palmeiro
———————————
4.5 - Mattingly
0.9 - P. Rose (Write-In)
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.
TheClockworkAngelCollection
Thomas best is 182
Of course, Cabrera still has some good years left, however, even if he repeats his last four years, he still won't match Thomas's best prime run. Cabrerra's last four years has been OPS+ of 177. FOur more of those and he still is at 177 for his best run....still short of Thomas.
Yeah, he won the triple crown, a nice 'novelty', as triple crown does not equate to 'better', and BA and RBI aren't exactly the best measures of a players ability.
So, yeah, for their career, depending how Cabrera ages, he could have a stronger career...but it looks like Thomas will still be the king of their prime years.
<< <i>
<< <i>If Thomas used steriods like the rest of them he would have had over 800 hr's and still be playing.
James >>
Lotta truth in that statement. Even in the era of mass steroid usage, a CLEAN Thomas was still able to dominate the sport for many years. >>
I don't believe he was clean, there is a lot of speculation that he was a big juicer
The lady doth protest too much, methinks
But , he was for sure not the greatest all time right hand hitter.
Roger Hornsby
Willie Mays
Jimmie Fox
DiMaggio
Aaron
are some players imo who are better