You are not logged in. Would you like to login or register?



1/06/2016 9:35 am  #1


Hall of Fame crap

My ballot would have included:
Griffey
Hoffman
Piazza
Edmonds

Griffey is a no-brainer.
Hoffman, for whatever reason, doesn't appear to be a lock. I understand the bias toward 1-inning closers, but if Eckersley is in there, then Hoffman has to be, too.
Piazza has the best offensive numbers of any catcher, and that ought to warrant induction. The allegation that his work was steroid-aided has never been proven. He never tested positive and his name was never on any list of users. This "he fits the profile" rationale is nonsense.
Edmonds is admittedly and purely a homer pick. His numbers don't warrant a Hall of Fame selection, but we'll always have the 2004 NLCS, won't we?

 

1/06/2016 10:27 am  #2


Re: Hall of Fame crap

Griffey gets in easy.

My ballot would also include:

Piazza- for the reasons you mentioned
Jeff Bagwell- Another guy who gets indicted for playing in the steroid era and looking like he might have used steroids.  That shouldn't be enough to keep someone out, and his numbers otherwise warrant induction.
Tim Raines- In an article yesterday, Derrick Goold described Raines as the 2nd best lead-off man of his generation behind the best lead-off man of all-time.  One other stat that Goold noted that I thought was really impressive.  As a lead-off man (particularly one with Raines' speed), Raines' job was to get on base.  Raines did so over 3900 times--more times than Tony Gwynn.  Raines' stolen base success rate (84.6%) is the best in the history of MLB for players with a significant number of steal attempts.  I know he had his issues with cocaine, but the numbers are good enough for me.

From there it gets a bit fuzzy for me.  Hoffman would be the next closest, but I'd want to look more closely at the save totals to see what's there.
 

Last edited by forsberg_us (1/06/2016 10:27 am)

 

1/06/2016 12:02 pm  #3


Re: Hall of Fame crap

One can make cases for both Raines and Bagwell, especially under the current standards for induction, but they both fall into the "Hall of Very Good" category for me. Much like Curt Schilling. 
I like numbers. I like milestones. Piazza hit more home runs than any catcher. Hoffman was the first guy to achieve 500 saves.
Raines didn't reach any of the benchmarks, and unfairly or not, he suffers from a comparison to Henderson. After 1987, his numbers tail off dramatically and he becomes ordinary. There were a couple of years when Vince Coleman was a better player.
Bagwell is probably right on the cusp. If he had gotten to 500 homers, he's looked upon more favorably. Without a milestone, he's a tick lower with the Paul Konerkos and the Carlos Delgados of the realm. Terrific players, but not Hall of Famers.

Last edited by artie_fufkin (1/06/2016 12:06 pm)

     Thread Starter
 

1/06/2016 12:41 pm  #4


Re: Hall of Fame crap

"I like numbers. I like milestones."

Then I offer these (stolen from articles written by Goold and Jayson Stark)

Bagwell:

-  
A man who can say that only he and Lou Gehrig ever ripped off 12 straight seasons at first with an adjusted OPS of 130 or better. A man who joins just Gehrig and Jimmie Foxx as the only first basemen in the 400-homer, .400-OBP Club. The only first baseman who has ever entered the 400-homer, 200-steal club. 

Raines: 

- Of the first 18 players to have 2,600 hits and 1,300 walks, 16 are in the Hall. Two are not. Raines and Pete Rose.
-  Raines has four season with at least 50 extra-base hits and 70 or more stolen bases. Four. Henderson and Ty Cobb combined had four. The other 200-plus Hall of Famers combined had … four. He would have a third of them if he were in Cooperstown.
Raines reached base more times (3,977) than Tony Gwynn, Honus Wagner, Lou Brock or Roberto Clemente. He owns the greatest stolen-base success rate (84.7 percent) of all time (among players with 400 or more attempts). He was the only player in history to steal 70-plus bases six seasons in a row (1981-86). He was so talented at reaching base pretty much every way possible, he had a seven-year stretch (1982-88) where he led the NL in walks, singles, doubles andtriples. 

 

1/06/2016 12:49 pm  #5


Re: Hall of Fame crap

One other thought (just my opinion, your's is different which is fine), but I only like milestones when they're accomplished by players who don't hang on for the sole purpose of getting to that milestone.

Don Sutton is a name that comes to mind.  Sutton lingered for more than a half-dozen seasons in a quest to get to 300 wins and 3,000 strikeouts.  He was very mediocre during those years, but earned enshrinement to the Hall because he hung around for those years.

Sandy Koufax doesn't meet any of the milestone criteria.  But that guy was absolutely dominant during a significant part of his career.  If you can achieve that level of dominance, the milestones, for me, are secondary.

 

1/06/2016 1:45 pm  #6


Re: Hall of Fame crap

All those points are valid, but I tend to get lost at ...

"an adjusted OPS of 130 or better"

I honestly don't know what this means. I mean, I know how to calculate OPS, but I don't know what an adjusted OPS is an I have no idea what it means in the context of whether a player has Hall of Fame credentials. Now, if you're on a list with Lou Gehrig because both of you hit 400-plus home runs, that's pretty good. But Dave Kingman is on that list, too, and Dave Kingman isn't a Hall of Famer by anyone's estimation, except maybe Mrs. Kingman's.

Last edited by artie_fufkin (1/06/2016 1:53 pm)

     Thread Starter
 

1/06/2016 1:48 pm  #7


Re: Hall of Fame crap

You get 10 picks correct?

Ill get these out of the way
Bonds
Clemens
Mcgwire


Now the rest:
Piazza-arguably the best offensive catcher ever
Griffey-sho in
Edmonds- maybe im bias. Career ops with .004 of griffey.  Edmonds became awesome when griffey stopped being.
Martinez-best dh ever. I might not like dh position but it exist
Hoffman-600 saves....come on

Last spots would be a toss up....sosa has 600hrs, bagwell and sheffield had a studly careers....pick two.  I think all 3 are deserving

Last edited by APIAD (1/06/2016 1:49 pm)

 

1/06/2016 1:52 pm  #8


Re: Hall of Fame crap

"Sandy Koufax doesn't meet any of the milestone criteria.  But that guy was absolutely dominant during a significant part of his career.  If you can achieve that level of dominance, the milestones, for me, are secondary."

Well, there's that eyeball test old school baseball people like Shaughnessy and Reynolds refer to. If you saw Koufax pitch, you knew he was the goods. And he had post-season success. Guys like Gibby and Dizzy Dean, even though they don't have any of the benchmarks, were dominant pitchers, albeit for shorter periods of time. It's the same argument people here are making for Schilling.
I was in the anti-Sutton camp for the longest time, but over time I've become a little bit more tolerant of the Don Suttons and the Craig Biggios of the world. Three hundred wins is a ton, and something we may never see again. No matter how long it takes to get there. In fact, he probably deserves some consideration for being able to take the ball every fifth day for as long as he did, like Biggio was able to be in the lineup every day long enough to get 3,000 hits.

     Thread Starter
 

1/06/2016 1:58 pm  #9


Re: Hall of Fame crap

APIAD wrote:

You get 10 picks correct?

Ill get these out of the way
Bonds
Clemens
Mcgwire


Now the rest:
Piazza-arguably the best offensive catcher ever
Griffey-sho in
Edmonds- maybe im bias. Career ops with .004 of griffey
Martinez-best dh ever. I might not like dh position but it exist
Hoffman-600 saves....come on

Last spots would be a toss up....sosa has 600hrs, bagwell and sheffield had a studly careers....pick two. I think all 3 are deserving

I'm moving toward the let-'em-all-in mentality the longer I go. Until we can definitively prove who was juicing and who wasn't - and we never will - we might as well just judge them on their numbers themselves.
There's supposed to be that character clause, but we've got wife beaters, child molesters, drunks, speed freaks, pot smokers, coke heads - everything but Scarlet Letter gamblers - in there now. Why are the steroid guys any different?

     Thread Starter
 

1/06/2016 1:59 pm  #10


Re: Hall of Fame crap

My problem with Schilling is much like mine with walker.  They were not good enough for engough in a row.

 

1/06/2016 2:08 pm  #11


Re: Hall of Fame crap

I forgot mussina.....he would occupie one of my 2 remaining spots

 

1/06/2016 7:49 pm  #12


Re: Hall of Fame crap

Griffey Jr. and Piazza got the votes.

Bagwell 71.6%, Raines 69.8% and Hoffman 67.3% next closest.

This sort of stupid shit happens every year, but who were the 3 people who didn't vote for Griffey Jr. and how do they keep their voting credentials?

 

1/06/2016 9:37 pm  #13


Re: Hall of Fame crap

forsberg_us wrote:

Griffey Jr. and Piazza got the votes.

Bagwell 71.6%, Raines 69.8% and Hoffman 67.3% next closest.

This sort of stupid shit happens every year, but who were the 3 people who didn't vote for Griffey Jr. and how do they keep their voting credentials?

 
Exactly. The only plausible explanation - and it's a flimsy one - is that those three guys were so sure Junior was going to get elected they wanted to vote for someone else who wasn't a lock.
But I'm with you. Why have a Hall of Fame at all if you don't think Ken Griffey Jr. belongs in it?

     Thread Starter
 

1/07/2016 1:08 am  #14


Re: Hall of Fame crap

Edmonds got less then 3% of the vote.

 

1/07/2016 9:40 am  #15


Re: Hall of Fame crap

APIAD wrote:

Edmonds got less then 3% of the vote.

Unfortunate. But not entirely unexpected. I want to know if the three guys who voted for Mike Sweeney are the same three guys who didn't vote for Griffey.
 

     Thread Starter
 

Board footera

 

Powered by Boardhost. Create a Free Forum

Quotes = [quote][/quote] Bold = [b][/b] Underlined = [u][/u] Italic = [i][/i] Link = [url][/url] Code = [code][/code] Image = [img][/img] Video = [video][/video]