Master Index of Archived Threads


That Other Hall of Fame

G-Fafif Nov 27 2009 04:03 PM

Ballot for 2010 announced here. Includes five Mets, all first-timers: • Roberto Alomar • Kevin Appier • David Segui • Robin Ventura • Todd Zeile Other candidates from lesser teams: Harold Baines, Bert Blyleven, Ellis Burks, Andre Dawson, Andres Galarraga, Pat Hentgen, Mike Jackson, Eric Karros, Ray Lankford, Barry Larkin, Edgar Martinez, Don Mattingly, Fred McGriff, Mark McGwire, Jack Morris, Dale Murphy, Dave Parker, Tim Raines, Shane Reynolds, Lee Smith, Alan Trammell

metsmarathon Nov 27 2009 04:36 PM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

blyleven, larkin, raines, alomar, and probably martinez

duan Nov 27 2009 04:41 PM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

[quote="G-Fafif"]Ballot for 2010 announced here. Includes five Mets, all first-timers: • Roberto Alomar yes • Kevin Appier no • David Segui no • Robin Ventura no • Todd Zeile no Other candidates from lesser teams: Harold Baines NO Bert Blyleven YES Ellis Burks - Ellis Burks might be my favourite non-met baseball player, he's a baseball warrior & we're it not for the fact that he only averaged less then 100 games a season he'd be in the HOF, but he did so he won't be. Andre Dawson, NO Andres Galarraga, NO Pat Hentgen, NO Mike Jackson,NO Eric Karros, NO Ray Lankford NO Barry Larkin absolutely YES Edgar Martinez, i'm verging on YES but not sure Don Mattingly, NO Fred McGriff I lean NO but could be swung Mark McGwire,NO Jack Morris, NO Dale Murphy NO Dave Parker NO Tim Raine SO TOTALLY YES Shane Reynolds NO Lee Smith, THIS IS ONE I'M REALLY WAVERING ON Alan Trammell YES

Kong76 Nov 27 2009 04:55 PM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

G-F: • Roberto Alomar • Kevin Appier • David Segui • Robin Ventura • Todd Zeile <<< Jeez, Alomar will be in the HOF someday ... but when I look at that list with my Mets glasses on I feel like I'm looking at it from some kind of bizzaro purgatory or something.

Ashie62 Nov 27 2009 05:39 PM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

Roberto Alomar Bert Blyleven Jack Morris

metsguyinmichigan Nov 27 2009 05:42 PM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

• Roberto Alomar Absolutely! • Kevin Appier Nope • David Segui Nope • Robin Ventura I like Robin Ventura, but he's not a Hall guy • Todd Zeile Nope. Hit the bleeping ball six-inches higher, dammit! Still not over that. Other candidates from lesser teams: Harold Baines, So close! Bert Blyleven, YES! Ellis Burks, nope Andre Dawson, YES Andres Galarraga, Nope Pat Hentgen, A good Michigander Mike Jackson, Didn't he die this summer? Eric Karros, Nope Ray Lankford, Nope Barry Larkin, YES! Edgar Martinez, Nope Don Mattingly, Plegh, Yankee taint Fred McGriff, Another oh-so-close. I wouldn't object if he was elected Mark McGwire, YES! Jack Morris, Nope Dale Murphy, YES! Dave Parker, Still very close! Tim Raines, YES! Though there is that big stain on his career. Oh, and there was a drug thing. Shane Reynolds, Nope Lee Smith, Another player I would not complain if elected Alan Trammell YES!

Kong76 Nov 27 2009 05:52 PM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

mgim: Zeile Nope. Hit the bleeping ball six-inches higher, dammit! Still not over that <<< That freakin' game just sits in my gut like a Shea parking lot pretzel and will never fully pass.

Nymr83 Nov 27 2009 06:11 PM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

• Roberto Alomar • Kevin Appier • David Segui • Robin Ventura • Todd Zeile I'm not sure if spitter makes it on the first ballot but he deserves to get in. The other guys likely won't hit the minimum needed to stay on the ballot another year, I'd guess Ventura comes closest though. mgim: Zeile Nope. Hit the bleeping ball six-inches higher, dammit! Still not over that Or Jay Payton could RUN instead of assuming that its gone.

Frayed Knot Nov 27 2009 06:27 PM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

With no obvious first-year no-brainers (Alomar looked like one at age 32 then somehow managed to fall off a big enough cliff to make it questionable) it should be a good year for older borderline types. I'd still vote Robby Alomar in but I think he's enough of a question mark in some minds to where they'll make him wait a year or two first. My main guy in the 'should already be in' category is Tim Raines. Maybe some of the newer sabermetrics-savvy voters will push him over the edge. I'd probably go for Alan Trammell over anyone else there - although I don't believe he's ever been close. Next I'd lean to Bert Blyleven although I won't go to the mat for that one. Mark McGwire deserves it but I have no problem as he stews waiting for the voters to get a better handle on the steroid era. Both Dawson & Larkin are short IMO - too many partial seasons for both - although I opt for Dawson of the two. Dale Murphy is Mattingly to me: six HoF seasons and then mediocrity after that. I'm a no - at least for now - on Edgar Martinez & McGriff.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Nov 27 2009 06:28 PM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

Oh for fuck's sakes, it was Timo, not Payton. Timo. TIMO! Never forget. Worst moment in Mets history, probably.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Nov 27 2009 06:30 PM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

5 I'd go for right now Roberto Alomar Bert Blyleven Barry Larkin Tim Raines Alan Trammell

Valadius Nov 27 2009 06:39 PM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

My ballot: Roberto Alomar Bert Blyleven Andre Dawson Barry Larkin Edgar Martinez Fred McGriff Mark McGwire Jack Morris Tim Raines Alan Trammell

Benjamin Grimm Nov 27 2009 06:42 PM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

Alomar and Raines.

seawolf17 Nov 27 2009 06:44 PM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

YES: • Roberto Alomar Bert Blyleven, Andre Dawson, Edgar Martinez, Mark McGwire, Jack Morris, Dale Murphy, Dave Parker, Tim Raines I was torn between Larkin and Trammell for my tenth spot, but couldn't decide, so I chose neither. NO: • Kevin Appier • David Segui • Robin Ventura • Todd Zeile Harold Baines, Ellis Burks, Andres Galarraga, Pat Hentgen, Mike Jackson, Eric Karros, Ray Lankford, Barry Larkin, Don Mattingly, Fred McGriff, Shane Reynolds, Lee Smith, Alan Trammell

Nymr83 Nov 27 2009 07:06 PM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

5 I'd go for right now Roberto Alomar Bert Blyleven Barry Larkin Tim Raines Alan Trammell I'm sure on Alomar, Blyleven, Raines and Trammell. I'm pretty sure about Larkin I wouldn't vote for anyone else eligible this year. yeah it was Timo not Payton, did Payton make a baserunning mistake in the playoffs? i feel like i remember one but i guess not.

metsguyinmichigan Nov 27 2009 07:15 PM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

[quote="John Cougar Lunchbucket":hpko81lq]Oh for fuck's sakes, it was Timo, not Payton. Timo. TIMO! Never forget. Worst moment in Mets history, probably.[/quote:hpko81lq] Do you ever find yourself at work kind of deep in thought and then, out of nowhere, have a disgusted, "Freaking Timo" just come out of nowhere? I don't blame Benitez for the walk to O'Neill because they red ass worked the count pretty well. But I do blame the guy who was the luckiest guy on the team to be there screwing up that moment.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Nov 27 2009 07:21 PM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

BOOK A HOTEL ROOM FOR JULY: Alomar (2nd-best 2B, post-Hornsby... and 2nd or 3rd biggest dick to put on a Met uniform in my lifetime) Blyleven (GTFI, already) Larkin (Could astonish in every facet of the game. If not for the injuries, he'd be a first-ballot guy; I think he's waiting a while) Martinez (A REALLY good hitter-- and actually pretty good on defense, when they let him play the field) McGwire (Well, duh) Murphy (If he'd played corner OF, or been less proficient defensively, he'd be sitting it out.) Raines (Will likely never make it in, for real. Damn shame.) Trammell (If not for Ripken's presence, he's getting a LOT more love for the HOF) BUY A TICKET WHENEVER YOU FEEL LIKE IT: Appier Baines Burks Dawson (So great at so many things. Except, you know, for the most important one in the game.) Galarraga Hentgen Jackson Karros Lankford Mattingly McGriff (When I looked closer at the numbers, this was a REALLY hard exclusion.) Morris (A reputation built on durability, a badass mustache and one great performance, really.) Parker Reynolds Segui Smith Ventura (I didn't see a picture of 43-year-old Nolan Ryan kicking the living crap out of him anywhere in the Hall. I think that's an omission.) Zeile (He dove right in and sucked the marrow of NYC like few other free agents the Mets have ever brought in. I'll always like him for that.) [quote="metsguyinmichigan":9pd3vjf9]Do you ever find yourself at work kind of deep in thought and then, out of nowhere, have a disgusted, "Freaking Timo" just come out of nowhere?[/quote:9pd3vjf9] Any time I see a ball hit the wall in left field, and whenever I see the date "2000."

Edgy DC Nov 27 2009 07:39 PM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

After over 150 years of MLB, Larkin is one of the top ten shortstops. In.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Nov 27 2009 07:55 PM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

If Ozzie Smith is in, then how do you keep out a guy who's almost his equal defensively, and hit at his peak-- a peak that lasted something like 12 seasons, which kind of counterbalances the injuries in my mind-- like Ryno with a much better eye? Since most pitchers fail-- actually OR in effect-- into bullpen duty, putting in anyone but the alltime best specialists in seems a bit odd (if it's my Hall, Fingers, Sutter and MAYBE Gossage come right out). Lee Smith didn't revolutionize the position. Outside of maybe two seasons, he wasn't ever dominant. His ERA+ collection would be great from a starter... but it's iffy from a closer. About the only standout thing about him is the longevity. To my mind, that isn't quite it.

Edgy DC Nov 27 2009 08:07 PM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

[quote="LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr":2yb22ap3]Raines (Will likely never make it in, for real. Damn shame.)[/quote:2yb22ap3] Disagree. He'll be in and sooner rather than later.

seawolf17 Nov 27 2009 08:13 PM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

Okay, I'm giving Larkin my tenth vote.

Swan Swan H Nov 27 2009 08:23 PM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

If someone had suggested in 1987 that Dale Murphy not only would not be a Hall of Famer, but would not really be a serious candidate after ten years of voting, I would have suggested that they were nuts. He was my favorite non-Met during his career, and while I don't know if he measures up statistically, for my money he was one of the best players of his era for a pretty long period. I'd love to see him get in.

batmagadanleadoff Nov 27 2009 08:55 PM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

[quote="Swan Swan H":1wj053g0]If someone had suggested in 1987 that Dale Murphy not only would not be a Hall of Famer, but would not really be a serious candidate after ten years of voting, I would have suggested that they were nuts. He was my favorite non-Met during his career, and while I don't know if he measures up statistically, for my money he was one of the best players of his era for a pretty long period. I'd love to see him get in.[/quote:1wj053g0] Maybe Murphy should've quit while he was ahead. Through the end of the 1987 season, Murphy was on quite a roll; six of his last eight seasons were MVP caliber and one other was All-Star, if not MVP caliber. He was everybody's lock for the Hall. (And Gooden. And Strawberry.) But he was never quite the same after 1988, for the rest of his career churning out seasons that were more Kingman than DiMaggio -- decent though increasingly diminishing power, decent batting eye, but abysmal batting averages and on base averages. He struck out a lot, too.

Swan Swan H Nov 27 2009 09:06 PM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

[quote="batmagadanleadoff":2sapdezx]Maybe Murphy should've quit while he was ahead. Through the end of the 1987 season, Murphy was on quite a roll; six of his last eight seasons were MVP caliber and one other was All-Star, if not MVP caliber. He was everybody's lock for the Hall. (And Gooden. And Strawberry.) But he was never quite the same after 1988, for the rest of his career churning out seasons that were more Kingman than DiMaggio -- decent though increasingly diminishing power, decent batting eye, but abysmal batting averages and on base averages. He struck out a lot, too.[/quote:2sapdezx] Makes sense. If 1987 was the last taste of Murphy in the voters' mouths he just might have gotten in. Just about everyone else I remember from my era of fandom who seemed like a lock that late in their career but is not in was derailed by drugs, whether recreational or performance-enhancing, or a serious character flaw (Rose in particular).

Number 6 Nov 27 2009 10:06 PM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

[quote="Nymr83":1po9ybxa]yeah it was Timo not Payton, did Payton make a baserunning mistake in the playoffs? i feel like i remember one but i guess not.[/quote:1po9ybxa] I remember a dribbler down the 3rd-base line that started out foul but dribbled fair before the bag, Jay not running, and being thrown out easily at first. Finer details may be wrong, and I don't remember at what point in the playoffs it was. I just remember being pissed off about it at the time. Once Bonds gets elected, the argument against McGwire will look impossibly silly. That is, unless Bonds doesn't get elected, in which case there's a different kind of silliness to be dealt with.

MFS62 Nov 28 2009 07:07 AM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

Roberto Alomar Harold Baines - NO , for the same reason Edgar Martinez is a no - they were in the game for a long time because of a silly rule. Bert Blyleven Andre Dawson - no, until I am convinced otherwide Barry Larkin Don Mattingly - no - too few really good years, and that's a shame Fred McGriff, Tim Raines - no(see Dawson) Lee Smith Alan Trammell Later

dgwphotography Nov 28 2009 08:24 AM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

My Ballot: Alomar - I really have to hold my nose for this one. Blyleven Larkin Raines Trammell Martinez and Baines do not get in, ever. Their careers were extended due to the bastardization of baseball known as the DH....

Vic Sage Nov 28 2009 09:09 AM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

Martinez and Baines do not get in, ever. Their careers were extended due to the bastardization of baseball known as the DH.... that is absolute and total bullshit, at least as far as Martinez is concerned. He was one of the most deadly hitters of his generation. If there were no DH, they'd have plunked him at 1b. You can't take away points because they played in the AL. Obviously, they get no BOOST from defensive contributions, but i don't get the logic of diminishing their accomplishments because of the rules they played under and how they were used by their managers. If you have an issue with the DH, write to the commissioner. Don't penalize HOF-caliber players. Certainly there are already 1-dimensional players in the HOF (ozzie, reggie, etc), so it is only a matter of whether your 1 dimension is of a signifcant magnitude to warrant HOF consideration. To automatically reject a player from consideration because he was primarily a DH is unfair, agenda-based, and frankly lazy.

Vic Sage Nov 28 2009 09:18 AM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

[u:2aqlh8pf]YES[/u:2aqlh8pf] Roberto Alomar Bert Blyleven Barry Larkin Tim Raines [u:2aqlh8pf]BORDERLINE - YES[/u:2aqlh8pf] Alan Trammell Mark McGwire Edgar Martinez [u:2aqlh8pf]BORDERLINE - NO[/u:2aqlh8pf] hArold Baines Andre Dawson Fred McGriff Don Mattingly Jack Morris Dale Murphy Dave Parker Lee Smith [u:2aqlh8pf]NO[/u:2aqlh8pf] Kevin Appier David Segui Robin Ventura Todd Zeile Ellis Burks Andres Galarraga Pat Hentgen Mike Jackson Eric Karros Ray Lankford Shane Reynolds

batmagadanleadoff Nov 28 2009 09:56 AM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

[quote="Vic Sage"] Martinez and Baines do not get in, ever. Their careers were extended due to the bastardization of baseball known as the DH.... that is absolute and total bullshit, at least as far as Martinez is concerned. He was one of the most deadly hitters of his generation. If there were no DH, they'd have plunked him at 1b. You can't take away points because they played in the AL. Obviously, they get no BOOST from defensive contributions, but i don't get the logic of diminishing their accomplishments because of the rules they played under and how they were used by their managers. If you have an issue with the DH, write to the commissioner. Don't penalize HOF-caliber players. Certainly there are already 1-dimensional players in the HOF (ozzie, reggie, etc), so it is only a matter of whether your 1 dimension is of a signifcant magnitude to warrant HOF consideration. To automatically reject a player from consideration because he was primarily a DH is unfair, agenda-based, and frankly lazy.

I'm in total agreement with you. The HOF would not be truly representative of Baseball if Designated Hitters were automatically excluded as a matter of fact. As far as I know, Edgar Martinez is the best DH in the history of the game and merits serious consideration. It's true that DH's don't play defense and therefore, aren't in a position (a position -- get it?) to contribute as much as fielders do. But so what? Modern relief pitchers (closers -- ugh!) have been fully accepted as legitimate HOF candidates even though they rarely pitch 100 innings in a season and almost never more than an inning a game. A full-time DH who accumulates 550-600 plate appearances in a season exerts a greater influence over his team's fortunes than an 85 inning a year relief pitcher.

Edgy DC Nov 28 2009 12:00 PM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

[quote="Number 6"]Once Bonds gets elected, the argument against McGwire will look impossibly silly. That is, unless Bonds doesn't get elected, in which case there's a different kind of silliness to be dealt with.

Well, please indulge me some of that silliness for a moment.

After a prodigious rookie season, McGwire spent much of his twenties career struggling to make consistent contact apart from his homers --- in a Kingmanian limbo where a player produces like an All Star, but remains frustrating to watch when the ball isn't flying out. And indeed he was an All Star --- if more justly so in some seasons than others --- but mostly on the very fringes of MVP consideration.

AGE	G	OPS	All-Star	MVP
23	151	.987	X	6
24	155	.830	X	19
25	143	.806	X	25
26	156	.859	X	11
27	154	.714	X	--
28	139	.970	X	4

Only truly in the MVP mix that first and last season.

But then, just as he seems to be turning a corner, he's hit with struggles to stay healthy --- the big mauler's classic case of back muscle problems.

AGE	G	OPS	All-Star	MVP
29	27	1.193	--	--
30	47	.887	--	--

You know the rest. After 30, he's a dreamboat. His numbers are sexier than opera gloves. It's hard to contextualize, because the whole game is exploding with offense, but he's right in the mix there, and when he shatters Roger Maris' record, his legacy becomes hard to deny, and when Bill James releases his New Historical Baseball Abstract in 2001, he has McGwire third on the All-Time list of firstbasemen.

AGE	G	OPS	All Star	MVP
31	104	1.125	X	16
32	130	1.198	X	7
33	156	1.039	X	16
34	155	1.222	X	2
35	153	1.120	X	16
36	89	1.229	X	5
37	97	.808	--	--

Now, looking at the rougly barbell shape of his career, it's tempting and almost too easy to say that he was having his troubles, tried performance-enhancing drugs, struggled for a few years to find the right balance betwixt performaning enhancing dosages and muscle-injuring dosages, until he arrived at the right cocktail, and hit the jackpot. But until he's more forthcoming, I don't begrudge the judges a bit for being miserly with their votes.

Interesting, seeing his second-place vote in his record breaking year, MVP voters were stingy to him also.

Bonds, on the other hand, had been on an Hall of Fame track by any standard when his physical and statistical explosion occurred.

smg58 Nov 28 2009 03:08 PM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

Bonds was a hall-of-famer without the roids. I don't believe that McGwire was. Either way, he's not close to the player that Bonds was. I'm still not sure how I feel about the steroids issue regarding the Hall of fame. And until I can make up my mind on a consistent and impartial way to adress it, I can't justify voting for anybody suspicious, including Bonds. But Blyleven, Raines, and Alomar get my vote, even though I'm still puzzled/annoyed at how Robbie turned mediocre the minute he donned the orange and blue.

Gwreck Nov 28 2009 03:26 PM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

I think we have this McGwire argument every year at this time. As usual, my position is to vote him in under the theory that he was hall-of-fame caliber in the context of the era. (Plenty of HOFers who got in the in context of their eras too -- ie. not having to play against anyone but whites). Anyway, my ballot: Alomar Blyleven Martinez McGwire

Edgy DC Nov 28 2009 04:41 PM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

OE: Tim Raines Roberto Alomar Bert Blyleven Barry Larkin Alan Trammell A lot of borderline guys who I want to look more closely at: Martinez and Gallaraga and Dawson, but those are my four. One extra thing to factor in about a longtime DH is the amount of injury risk he's protected from that other guys don't have to confront. I'm not sure how to factor that in, but it was certainly relevant in Paul Molitor's case. Take his offensive record and he's a Hall of Famer even if he was a poor second- or third-baseman through the latter half of his career. I think evidence suggests he wouldn't be, but evidence also suggests he'd've had trouble staying in the lineup.

Number 6 Nov 28 2009 04:42 PM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

[quote="Edgy DC"]Now, looking at the rougly barbell shape of his career, it's tempting and almost too easy to say that he was having his troubles, tried performance-enhancing drugs, struggled for a few years to find the right balance betwixt performaning enhancing dosages and muscle-injuring dosages, until he arrived at the right cocktail, and hit the jackpot. But until he's more forthcoming, I don't begrudge the judges a bit for being miserly with their votes.

I respect the points that you're making. Personally, though, I do begrudge the judges. Just to first get it out of the way, any argument that McGwire's career numbers are not Hall-worthy, without the context of the PED controversy, is not viable, a point which you acknowledge. I'm guessing that most voters feel that way also. Those that don't, I'm guessing, are just trying to avoid the dissonance or controversy that comes with the PED argument as a whole. Numbers-wise, he's a Hall-of-Famer, and it's not all that close.

The argument you stated then relies on a myriad of assumptions that we need to make in order to support that his numbers are due to PED use.

1.) McGwire used steroids throughout this period.
2.) The steroids caused an increase in skill that directly led to his HOF numbers.
3.) Known steroid use is a viable criteria for denial of admission into the HOF.

The first is a guess based on extrapolations from vague testimony; he may have used once or twice, or the whole period, who knows. We shouldn't set the standard that lack of omission on the part of the player means we can assume the level of his guilt based on the way his numbers trend. The game has always had outlying seasons and unusual exceptions, and they can't all be subject to suspicion on mostly unknown premises. This potentially opens anybody with numbers deemed outlying or unusual to a PED witch-hunt. All one needs to do is look at the fingers constantly being pointed at certain players based only on their body shape, size, or a late-career power surge. While there may be more now, I don't know, to assume that particular examples are due to steroids and have that impact HOF voting strikes me as arbitrary and unfair.

The second is unprovable at this juncture, and likely always will be, regardless of what the numbers tell us. We can't even say with certainty that steroid use is correlated with improved performance, let alone that the link is causative. While it may seem like a safe assumption, that just isn't enough for me.

The third sets a poor precedent. With all of the athletes who are currently in the HOF who we know took performance enhancing drugs (mostly amphetamines), the idea that we're going to inkblot an entire era also seems arbitrary. This is the most arguable of the three, but considering that we're not going to know who did what, for how long, and what the effects are anyway in the vast majority of the cases, the practical impact will be a lot of tail-chasing. Ultimately, we'll end up denying HOF inclusion to certain players based on circumstantial evidence and assumption, just like what's happening to McGwire.

Interesting, seeing his second-place vote in his record breaking year, MVP voters were stingy to him also.

I'm not sure it's that interesting. Sosa also had a phenomenal season, well justifying an MVP award. Are you suggesting that the voters were stingy to McGwire because they thought he was on the juice?

Vic Sage Nov 28 2009 05:00 PM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

[quote="Edgy DC"]Roberto Alomar Bert Blyleven Barry Larkin Alan Trammell A lot of borderline guys who I want to look more closely at: Martinez and Gallaraga and Dawson, but those are my four. One extra thing to factor in about a longtime DH is the amount of injury risk he's protected from that other guys don't have to confront. I'm not sure how to factor that in, but it was certainly relevant in Paul Molitor's case. Take his offensive record and he's a Hall of Famer even if he was a poor second- or third-baseman through the latter half of his career. I think evidence suggests he wouldn't be, but evidence also suggests he'd've had trouble staying in the lineup.

no Raines? not even as a borderline guy?

and to count against DHs the injuries they don't have is... what's the word?... oh, never mind.

Edgy DC Nov 28 2009 05:15 PM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

The argument you stated then relies on a myriad of assumptions that we need to make in order to support that his numbers are due to PED use. 1.) McGwire used steroids throughout this period. 2.) The steroids caused an increase in skill that directly led to his HOF numbers. 3.) Known steroid use is a viable criteria for denial of admission into the HOF. I actually said that it's almost too easy to build this argument, but I don't think it's unfair for a voter, if that's what he's of a mind to do, to draw the broadest conclusion from McGwire's weasel move before Congress. Innocent until proven gulity is not a standard a Hall of Fame voter has to meet. The Hall of Fame is not a right that a player is denied by not being admitted to, but a privelege he has to earn. And I don't think the statistical argument is so airtight. Through age 27, when he had been up and down for years, his comparables are this: 1) Nate Colbert 2) John Mayberry 3) Fred McGriff 4) Willie McCovey (HoF) 5) Carlos Delgado (Not Yet Eligible) 6) Richie Sexson (NYE) 7) Derrek Lee (NYE) 8) Justin Morneau 9) Jason Thompson 10) Pete Incaviglia Through age 30, when he was turning a corner, but couldn't stay on the field, his comps look like this: 1) Cecil Fielder 2) Richie Sexson (NYE) 3) Willie McCovey (HoF) 4) Fred McGriff 5) Nate Colbert 6) Pat Burrell (NYE) 7) Glenn Davis 8) Gil Hodges 9) Ryan Howard (NYE) 10) Mo Vaughn (NYE) The judges are enjoined to take sportsmanship and character into account when voting, and it's totally fair to say that he failed them in this regard. It's damn unfair that McGwire was sobpoenaed and others weren't, but how he acquitted himself is a fact of history.

Edgy DC Nov 28 2009 05:18 PM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

[quote="Vic Sage"][quote="Edgy DC"]Roberto Alomar Bert Blyleven Barry Larkin Alan Trammell A lot of borderline guys who I want to look more closely at: Martinez and Gallaraga and Dawson, but those are my four. One extra thing to factor in about a longtime DH is the amount of injury risk he's protected from that other guys don't have to confront. I'm not sure how to factor that in, but it was certainly relevant in Paul Molitor's case. Take his offensive record and he's a Hall of Famer even if he was a poor second- or third-baseman through the latter half of his career. I think evidence suggests he wouldn't be, but evidence also suggests he'd've had trouble staying in the lineup.

no Raines? not even as a borderline guy?

and to count against DHs the injuries they don't have is... what's the word?... oh, never mind.

Oh, definitely Raines. I thought I had him. He's first of the lot.

Rockin' Doc Nov 28 2009 09:19 PM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

[u:tdj9lcc8]Definites[/u:tdj9lcc8] Tim Raines Roberto Alomar Barry Larkin Bert Blyleven [u:tdj9lcc8]Borderline [/u:tdj9lcc8]- I could go either way with their vote. Edgar Martinez Alan Trammel Fred McGriff Harold Baines Andre Dawson Don Mattingly

Chad Ochoseis Nov 28 2009 10:42 PM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

I've got to admit that I don't get all the Tim Raines luv. I was a Tim Raines fan. I like speed and OBP. He was fun to watch and my memory is that he was good but not great defensively. I enjoyed seeing the Expos not suck for a few years back in the Raines/Dawson days. There's no question that Raines had an excellent career. But his stats aren't clearly HOF quality. His career OPS+ of 123 is less than five points better than Andre Dawson's, Dale Murphy's and even Dave Parker's, and it's not as good as Burks, McGriff, or Mattingly. It's one point less than Rusty Staub's and five points less than Jim Wynn's. I wouldn't vote for any of those players, but if I had to choose one, I'd flip a coin to decide between Mattingly and Murphy. Alomar, Larkin, Blyleven and Martinez are on my ballot. Maybe Trammell, if I'm in a good mood on the day I'm voting. McGwire is a tough call for me for the same reasons Edgy gives. I'll vote for Raines to join Bert Campaneris, Tommy John, Dwight Evans, Al Oliver, and hundreds more in the hall of Really Good Ballplayers Who Aren't Quite HOFers. Enjoy the honor, and be sure to keep a spot warm for Scott Rolen.

Number 6 Nov 28 2009 10:59 PM Re: That Other Hall of Fame Edited 3 time(s), most recently on Nov 28 2009 11:16 PM

[quote="Edgy DC"]I actually said that it's almost too easy to build this argument, but I don't think it's unfair for a voter, if that's what he's of a mind to do, to draw the broadest conclusion from McGwire's weasel move before Congress.

Maybe we are speaking in different terms, then. I am working from my own perspective, in which I'm going to judge a player according to my own criteria. I really don't care about what a "voter" bases his/her criteria on. To me, applying "the broadest" unsubstantiated assumptions to McGwire is arbitrary and unfair for the reasons I stated above, and I expect the judges to apply a standard that's not arbitrary and unfair.

[quote="Edgy DC"]Innocent until proven gulity is not a standard a Hall of Fame voter has to meet. The Hall of Fame is not a right that a player is denied by not being admitted to, but a privelege he has to earn.

That privilege, again speaking idealistically, is best earned by a fair and universally applied set of standards. In order to be so, those standards must be founded on what we do know rather than on what we may arbitrarily assume, otherwise the concept of "earning" is utterly meaningless and subjective. Again, I expect those voting to abide by this as well. If they don't, I'm disappointed, as I am with McGwire's poor showing in the HOF voting thus far.

[quote="Edgy DC"]And I don't think the statistical argument is so airtight. Through age 27, when he had been up and down for years, his comparables are this:

1) Nate Colbert
2) John Mayberry
3) Fred McGriff
4) Willie McCovey (HoF)
5) Carlos Delgado (Not Yet Eligible)
6) Richie Sexson (NYE)
7) Derrek Lee (NYE)
8) Justin Morneau
9) Jason Thompson
10) Pete Incaviglia

Through age 30, when he was turning a corner, but couldn't stay on the field, his comps look like this:

1) Cecil Fielder
2) Richie Sexson (NYE)
3) Willie McCovey (HoF)
4) Fred McGriff
5) Nate Colbert
6) Pat Burrell (NYE)
7) Glenn Davis
8) Gil Hodges
9) Ryan Howard (NYE)
10) Mo Vaughn (NYE)

And, again for the reasons stated above, I am less interested in a bisected portion of his career than his overall numbers. His overall numbers are unassailable, a fact which I believe you acknowledge. If you disagree, do tell.

[quote="Edgy DC"]The judges are enjoined to take sportsmanship and character into account when voting, and it's totally fair to say that he failed them in this regard. It's damn unfair that McGwire was sobpoenaed and others weren't, but how he acquitted himself is a fact of history.

Sportsmanship and character are a small part of voting. How do you quantify them against on-field accomplishment? Clearly, there is a give-and-take there, or the HOF wouldn't have several deserving players that are currently enshrined. So, how do we balance "sportsmanship and character" against on-field accomplishment?

The first pass for me would be to try and substantiate the "sportsmanship and character" criticisms, to see if they're even worth a HOF demerit. Since there's little to substantiate the actual impact his assumed transgressions had on his numbers or his character, any distance we knock him back for it must be negligible. Personally, I don't want to knock him back for it at all, since I believe that sets a malleable (and therefore miserable) precedent. To me, that rule is to keep out the Hal Chases of the world, rather than a guy whose numbers are clearly there, and whose offenses are unknowable at best.

On Edit: All edits were cosmetic, my grammar and spelling isn't the best at this time of night.

Valadius Nov 28 2009 11:11 PM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

The weakness of OPS and OPS+ is that it disproportionately favors power hitters and slugging percentage. Tim Raines is one of four players with 800 stolen bases. The man tore up the 1980s. I'm not getting people who aren't getting Tim Raines.

Edgy DC Nov 29 2009 06:21 AM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

[quote="Number 6"]Sportsmanship and character are a small part of voting. How do you quantify them against on-field accomplishment? Clearly, there is a give-and-take there, or the HOF wouldn't have several deserving players that are currently enshrined. So, how do we balance "sportsmanship and character" against on-field accomplishment?

I don't know that they're necessarily small. Some voters may consider them larger than others. The listed criteria certainly don't say how large they should be held. You can only ask a voter (or a non voting supporter or critic) that they apply these terms equally to all candidates. What I will argue is that McGwire's choices have failed the game terribly. Many others, to varying degrees, have also. I ask all judges to apply their standards fairly and honorably and always seeking facts. But pretending that McGwire's non-answers mean we can't conclude anything is sticking our heads in the sand. We know he's guilty and more guilty than he's comfortable revealing publickly.

Benjamin Grimm Nov 29 2009 06:25 AM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

Count me among those who think McGwire disgraced the game, and no matter what his numbers are, he doesn't deserve Fame. Same for Bonds and Clemens. It's not the Hall of Great Statistics.

duan Nov 29 2009 08:07 AM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

I'm not voting for McGwire, but we're going to get in really sticky territory now that we know that 104 (or whatever the number was) of MLB players definitively failed drugs tests, obviously the player who's be the best player of his generation was one of them. Does this mean that we have no Alex Rodriguez in the hall of fame? Similarly people have mentioned about Tim Raines' candidature being invalidated by his cocaine abuse. Frankly, I don't think cocaine was used to be performance enhancing and that his use of cocaine was recreational, that he was prepared to challenge his dependancy and come out the other side is actually a positive aspect in my book. The lack of appreciation for his consistently high obp and his extremely efficient and plentiful stealing proves that Rickey Henderson knew what he was doing when he was trying to make his name, the gap between them is a few points of eqa and a slightly longer tail of speed.

MFS62 Nov 29 2009 08:25 AM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

[quote="Benjamin Grimm"]Count me among those who think McGwire disgraced the game, and no matter what his numbers are, he doesn't deserve Fame. Same for Bonds and Clemens. It's not the Hall of Great Statistics .

I've been saying that for years. But its always good to hear(read) it again.
Thank you.

Later

Rockin' Doc Nov 29 2009 01:10 PM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

Duan - "The lack of appreciation for his (Raines) consistently high obp and his extremely efficient and plentiful stealing proves that Rickey Henderson knew what he was doing when he was trying to make his name, the gap between them is a few points of eqa and a slightly longer tail of speed." I agree wholeheartedly. Ricky Henderson is arguably among the greatest leadoff hitters in the history of major league baseball. Few people question his first ballot election into Cooperstown. However, Tim Raines' career statistics closely mirror those of Henderson and I am amazed at the difficulty he has had in garnering support. Henderson .279/.401/.419/.820/127/80.8% (Avg./OBP/SLG/OPS/OPS+/BS%) Raines.......294/.385/.425/.810/123/84.7% Both Henderson and Raines made his ML debut in 1979 and had long illustrious careers (Henderson played 25 seasons and Raines played 23 seasons). Henderson appeared on 94.8% of the ballots in his first year of eligibility to the HOF, while Raines appeared on only 24.3% of the ballots his first year. The discrepancy between their numbers is not nearly that vast to account for such a difference in their recognitiion by the HOF voters, in my opinion. I think Tim Raines two biggest problems were that he generally did not have the good fortune of playing for as successful a teams as Henderson frequently did and he was not nearly as good at self promoting as was Ricky Henderson.* Raines never fully escaped from the immense shadow that Henderson cast over the game. I'm not arguing that Henderson wasn't the better player. He was certainly the best leadoff hitter of his era and possibly in the history of the game. However, Tim Raines was easily the second best of the quarter century era in which he played and arguably amongst the elite leadoff men in the the history of the game. *No one short of possibly Reggie Jackson was as good at self promotion as was Ricky Henderson.

Edgy DC Nov 29 2009 01:40 PM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

Raines' biggest problem is likely the less productive (disease impaired) second-half of his career disallowed him from reaching the magic number of 3000 hits. He'd also be in right now if he had also passed Lou Brock on the all-time stolen base list. Nonetheless, I'm certain that he'll get in. The Henderson comparison will continue to come up and boost his candidacy, just as Sutter boosted Gossage and Reese (slowly) boosted Rizzutto. Some people are just so naturally compared that they can't help getting caught in each other's drafts.

Gwreck Nov 29 2009 11:14 PM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

[quote="Benjamin Grimm"]Count me among those who think McGwire disgraced the game, and no matter what his numbers are, he doesn't deserve Fame. Same for Bonds and Clemens. It's not the Hall of Great Statistics.

Are you in favor of removing Ty Cobb from the Hall of Fame? What about Gaylord Perry and Whitey Ford?

Benjamin Grimm Nov 30 2009 04:04 AM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

What's the beef about Whitey Ford? I wouldn't have voted for Gaylord Perry. And Ty Cobb? More of a scoundrel than Pete Rose. Yes, I'd drop him if I could.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Nov 30 2009 07:05 AM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

[quote="Benjamin Grimm"]What's the beef about Whitey Ford?

"I didn't begin cheating until late in my career, when I needed something to help me survive. I didn't cheat when I won the twenty-five games in 1961. I don't want anybody to get any ideas and take my Cy Young Award away. And I didn't cheat in 1963 when I won twenty-four games. Well, maybe a little."

-Whitey Ford, from Slick: My Life in and Around Baseball

Whitey practically had a graduate degree in ball-doctoring, and admitted as much in his post-career autobiography. Specifically, he bragged about being able to cut a ball in more ways than any other hurler, using his wedding ring, belt buckle, or Elston Howard; he also threw a "loaded" ball (using turpentine and a number of other adulterants) extensively during the latter half of his career, including during the 1962 All-Star Game, in order to strike out Willie Mays.

Edgy DC Nov 30 2009 07:16 AM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

[quote="duan"]I'm not voting for McGwire, but we're going to get in really sticky territory now that we know that 104 (or whatever the number was) of MLB players definitively failed drugs tests, obviously the player who's be the best player of his generation was one of them.

Let us go bravely and prepared to paint with nuance. It's not for the faint of heart.
[quote="Rockin' Doc"]*No one short of possibly Reggie Jackson was as good at self promotion as was Ricky Henderson.
I don't know. That Pete Rose guy did a pretty good job --- until he didn't.

Besides, Yankee fans mostly hated Rickey Henderson. He may have been an aggressive self-promoter, but it certainly didn't always take, and sometimes backfired.

People bought Rose's act completely and utterly --- until they didn't.

metirish Nov 30 2009 08:14 AM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

I think Halls of fame are overrated , it might well be becasue it's not a big deal in the part of the world I come from. Having said that I would really like to visit Cooperstown.

Centerfield Nov 30 2009 10:30 AM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

[quote="Number 6":3maj9rrh] To me, applying "the broadest" unsubstantiated assumptions to McGwire is arbitrary and unfair for the reasons I stated above, and I expect the judges to apply a standard that's not arbitrary and unfair. That privilege, again speaking idealistically, is best earned by a fair and universally applied set of standards. In order to be so, those standards must be founded on what we do know rather than on what we may arbitrarily assume, otherwise the concept of "earning" is utterly meaningless and subjective. Again, I expect those voting to abide by this as well. If they don't, I'm disappointed, as I am with McGwire's poor showing in the HOF voting thus far. [/quote:3maj9rrh] It seems like I spend hours trying to make this point every year we discuss Hall of Fame standards. From now on, I'm just going to quote Number 6. Well said.

Edgy DC Nov 30 2009 10:39 AM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

But I didn't apply the broadest assumption to his candidacy. As I tried to make clear, his career track through age 30 suggested he was heading for fringe candidacy.

Centerfield Nov 30 2009 12:20 PM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

The way I understood you (based upon the first post in this thread) was that you wanted to draw broad assumptions from his actions before Congress and conclude he used steroids. You seemed to intimate that "innocent until proven guilty" was a standard Hall of Fame voters need not adhere by. My point, this year and years before, was that if the Hall is going to have any credibility, you must have some sort of established standards. The only way I know to do that is to presume innocent until proven guilty. The only way you could go "guilty until proven innocent" is if 1. All players were put through the same, uniformly-applied background checks for performance enhancing drugs. 2. No player were eligible for the Hall until they had met some minimum standard of innocence Otherwise, as Number 6 says, the Hall becomes more and more arbitrary and meaningless.

Edgy DC Nov 30 2009 12:45 PM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

[quote="Centerfield"]The way I understood you (based upon the first post in this thread) was that you wanted to draw broad assumptions from his actions before Congress and conclude he used steroids.

I want to and do draw an assumption. I assume he cheated and lied repeatedly about it, based on his conspicuous dodging of questions about it before Congress. And he did that after lying for years about it. It's up to you whether they're broad assumptions, but I certainly deny that my assumption is "the broadest."

You seemed to intimate that "innocent until proven guilty" was a standard Hall of Fame voters need not adhere by.

I do more than intimate it. More importantly, I don't think the Hall of fame has to withold from drawing conclusions that a refusal to answer questions before Congress is incriminating.

My point, this year and years before, was that if the Hall is going to have any credibility, you must have some sort of established standards. The only way I know to do that is to presume innocent until proven guilty.

I don't know why. More importantly, I don't know why we need to pretend that we can't draw conclusions from a guy refusing to answer a question. It's an honor he's applying to earn, not a prison sentence we are considering him for. We have enough evidence to rationally conclude that he acted dishonorably. You can weigh that large or small, but it's irrational to pretend it doesn't exist.

The only way you could go "guilty until proven innocent" is if...

I don't go "guilty until proven innoncent." I go "guilty as rationally concluded from the evidence before me." I wouldn't hire a guy for a job under such circumstances. Why would I give him baseball's highest honor?

Centerfield Nov 30 2009 01:49 PM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

What do you do with players where the evidence is inconclusive? Or where there is no evidence one way or the other?

Number 6 Nov 30 2009 01:58 PM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

[quote="Edgy DC":2vcpq51o]But I didn't apply the broadest assumption to his candidacy. As I tried to make clear, his career track through age 30 suggested he was heading for fringe candidacy.[/quote:2vcpq51o] My use of the word "broadest" was in response to this: [quote="Edgy DC":2vcpq51o]I actually said that it's almost too easy to build this argument, but I don't think it's unfair for a voter, if that's what he's of a mind to do, to draw the broadest conclusion from McGwire's weasel move before Congress.[/quote:2vcpq51o] From what I understand of this post, and correct me if I'm wrong, while you may not apply the broadest of conclusions, you would have no criticism for those who do. The broadest conclusion is not just that he used steroids. It's that he used them, he used them throughout the period in question, they impacted his numbers, and this turned him from a fringe to a HOF player. While I certainly see how one can rationally construct steroid use out of his testimony, the rest you can't. In fact, McGwire probably couldn't even substantiate the latter two assumptions himself even if he was being 100% candid.

Edgy DC Nov 30 2009 02:02 PM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

If there is no evidence one way or the other, there's no evidence. The electorate is made up of reporters, and I think they'd do very well to call up every player they are considering and question them on the subject. Yeah, I guess that I did use the word broadest, but I wouldn't indict him that deeply myself. But we can reasonably assume he cheated. He refuses to clarify the extent. But I guess I shouldn't defend any conclusion but my own.

Number 6 Nov 30 2009 02:43 PM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

[quote="Edgy DC"]Yeah, I guess that I did use the word broadest, but I wouldn't indict him that deeply myself. But we can reasonably assume he cheated. He refuses to clarify the extent. But I guess I shouldn't defend any conclusion but my own.

Actually, the more I look back at your argument, the more I wonder which conclusions are yours and which aren't. Are we taking the "barbell" argument off the table? That relies on a lot of assumptions about the duration of McGwire's PED use and the impact of steroid use in general that also can't be inferred from his testimony.

If your only argument is that we can reasonably infer he used steroids from his testimony, and thus he should not be in the HOF, let's discuss that. Unless you think the other stuff is also valid criteria.

HahnSolo Nov 30 2009 02:46 PM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

Sorry to interrupt this discussion, but can someone offer an argument why Barry Larkin is a slam-dunk in some people's eyes? Cuz I don't see it. I see a guy who played 9 full seasons, who's 162-game averages are nothing so special. Numbers? I'll sound like a grouchy old sportswriter, but no 100-RBI seasons, and only two 100-runs seasons. No black ink, though he did win one MVP. Then again, Piazza and Karros, and even Bichette had better years (and like Larkin, their teams made the postseason). Help a friend out. Why should I advocate Barry Larkin for Cooperstown?

Edgy DC Nov 30 2009 02:54 PM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

I describe his productivity as a barbell. His career takes a harsh and unlikely turn after 30. Considering his incriminating behavior, I associate these. I want him to be more forthcoming and cooperative in helping me understand his career. I don't think he should get past a panel considering him for baseball's highest honor by lying and refusing to answer when cornered.

Centerfield Nov 30 2009 03:03 PM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

The reason I ask what you do with the ballplayer where there is no evidence presented, one way or the other, is because it will illustrate what presumption you are working from. Innocent until proven guilty, or guilty until proven innocent. You cannot avoid subscribing to one of those two theories.

Edgy DC Nov 30 2009 03:12 PM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

Sure you can. There's the "innoncent until I'm satisfied of his guilt enough to pass on him" position. We're not indicting the guy. We're enshrining him. I'm not really concerned with the legal parallel of presumed innocence. Sure, it's kind and it's compassionate. Go with it if you want. I'm concerned with drawing or not drawing conclusions based on his refusal to testify. I have no problem with doing that. It's not guilt or innocence at all, in the end, that we're trying to determine, but qualification for the Hall of Fame.

Centerfield Nov 30 2009 03:45 PM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

I'm not trying to be argumentative here. I was simply asking you to clarify if your default point is that of innocence or that of guilt.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Nov 30 2009 04:25 PM Re: That Other Hall of Fame Edited 4 time(s), most recently on Dec 02 2009 09:21 AM

[quote="HahnSolo"]Sorry to interrupt this discussion, but can someone offer an argument why Barry Larkin is a slam-dunk in some people's eyes? Cuz I don't see it. I see a guy who played 9 full seasons, who's 162-game averages are nothing so special. Numbers? I'll sound like a grouchy old sportswriter, but no 100-RBI seasons, and only two 100-runs seasons. No black ink, though he did win one MVP. Then again, Piazza and Karros, and even Bichette had better years (and like Larkin, their teams made the postseason). Help a friend out. Why should I advocate Barry Larkin for Cooperstown?

Played a premium defensive position. Played said position superlatively, and may just have been* better with the glove than Ozzie during the majority of the time they were both in the majors ('86-'94).

Offensively, his numbers are watered down by his decline from 37-40. And he didn't have eye-popping power like Mr. Cub. But the overall career line(.295/.371/.444, 117 OPS+) and 162-game averages (15 HR, 28 steals at a Henderson-topping 83 percent clip)-- believe it or not-- compare pretty decently to guys like Joe Morgan (15 HR/162, .271/.392/.427, 132 OPS+), Luke Appling (.310/.399/.398, 112 OPS+, 12 steals), Joe Cronin (.301/.390/.468, 119 OPS+), Robin Yount (14 HR/162, .285/.342/.430, 115 OPS+) and Paul Molitor (14 HR/162, .306/.369/.448, 122 OPS+), never mind guys like Aparicio and Maranville. In short, he was a contact guy with power (averaging only 61 strikeouts per 162 games) who still got a ton of walks (70 walks per 162 games)... a rare thing in a middle infielder, much less one who fielded as well as he did.

Yes, injuries spiked his chances at milestone numbers and serve to blunt the impact of even his finer seasons. But even the partial seasons were good-- from 1988 through 2000, he put up OPS+es above 130 7 times, and didn't dip below 103. And the rates, for over a decade, were superlative (.305/.381/.463 during that 12-year, injury-fraught peak)-- adjusted for position, miles better than guys like Karros and Bichette (who was putting up those numbers alongside legendary batsmen like Vinny Castilla and Ellis Burks in a hitters' playland; hell, Walt Weiss put up league-average numbers there). His first 1300 at-bats-- taking you through the beginning of his decline-- compare very favorably to a certain slam-dunk Sportsman:

P L A Y E R G AVG OBP SLG OPS IsoD IsoP
Barry Larkin 1328 .305 .379 .487 .866 .074 .182
Shmerek Shmeter 1366 .315 .385 .463 .848 .070 .148

He was a defensive ace who got on base like a poor-man's Morgan, slugged like Ripken, and stole 25-30 bases a year with the efficiency of a Raines or Henderson for over a decade. He's Jeter in a pitcher's park, with better basestealing and defense. Durability is important, but it isn't the defining characteristic of a HOFer-- greatness is. In moments, for long stretches, and throughout the arc of his career, Larkin was great.



*My kingdom for more mid-80s DEWANish defensive nerdery.

Edgy DC Nov 30 2009 07:55 PM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

[quote="Centerfield":1ou9llok]I'm not trying to be argumentative here. I was simply asking you to clarify if your default point is that of innocence or that of guilt.[/quote:1ou9llok] As I said, innocent.

Edgy DC Dec 02 2009 07:42 AM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

I'm going to be petty and withdraw my vote for Larkin. I'm just now recalling that he rejected a trade to the Mets. BOOOOO!

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Dec 02 2009 09:10 AM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

[quote="Edgy DC"]I'm going to be petty and withdraw my vote for Larkin. I'm just now recalling that he rejected a trade to the Mets. BOOOOO!

Hey, I'm still voting for Alomar, despite his accepting the move.

metsguyinmichigan Dec 02 2009 11:33 PM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

An ex-Mets' perspective... Brent Mayne posts who he's vote for on his blog... 2010 Hall of Fame Nominees December 2nd, 2009 It’s about that time of year again…Hall of Fame voting time. Here are the nominees on the ballot this year and here is how I would vote if given the chance. NEW CANDIDATES 1.. Roberto Alomar - yep, I’d vote him in. 10 plus gold gloves, hitting, baserunning, incredible instincts, World Series teams, didn’t get injured much, the whole package. 2. Kevin Appier - if being strange were one of the criteria for getting in, he’d be a first balloter. Otherwise, I love you Kev but no dice. 3. Ellis Burks – one of the great guys to play, but again nope. 4. Andres Galarraga - great nickname “the big cat” and was dominant for a long while, but just not enough. 5. Pat Hentgen - a Cy Young award and definitely a battler, but no. 6. Barry Larkin - real tough one for me….I…don’t….think….this…. time. Fantastic player, a million All-Star appearances. If not for Ozzie Smith, he’d have a million Gold Gloves. A world series ring, a 30-30 year, a great leader, etc. I just don’t know. I could go either way. A what the hell, I’ll throw him a vote. You’re in Barry. 7. Edgar Martinez – best right handed hitter I ever played against. Maybe the best hitter period. I think his hitting style has influenced everybody since. Must have been allergic to the leather though. For that reason, it’s a tough call. But because the O was so great, he gets my vote…yes. 8. Fred McGriff - nah. A great player, a dominant player for a while . Another candidate for best nickname ever with “crime dog”. I just can’t do it though. Maybe I would have voted for him if he hadn’t been a spokesman for those Tom Emanski ESPN baseball training videos….that big ol hat and all. 9. Mike Jackson, Ray Lankford, Eric Karros, Shane Reynolds, David Segui, Todd Zeile, and Robin Ventura. No, no, no, no, no, no, and no. 10. Brent Mayne - There must have been some kind of misprint because I’m eligible but didn’t get on the ballot. Like I said, must be a misprint…it’s ok, everybody makes mistakes. Would I vote for him? Hell ya. Decent hitter, no pop, great all around guy, and the best defensive catcher in the history of the game. Period.

Edgy DC Dec 03 2009 05:48 AM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

There's got to be a way I can get paid for reading Brent Mayne's blog.

metirish Dec 03 2009 07:20 AM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

Alomar oh his time with the Mets in an interview with Klapisch. Alomar is equally clear-eyed about his disappointing tenure with the Mets. He batted just .266 in 2002, dropping 70 points off his previous year’s average in Cleveland. Alomar was hitting .265 halfway through the 2003 season before he was traded to the White Sox. Realizing he was quickly losing his elite skills – “I never would’ve allowed myself to be remembered as just an average player stealing money” — Alomar retired in 2004 at age 36. His mediocrity as a Met still gnaws at him, but Alomar believes the culture of underachievement affected everyone at Shea. “No one played up to their potential in those years; that’s the only way I could explain it,” he said. “There were a lot of unhappy guys, and that rubs off on the way you perform on the field. I wasn’t myself, but no one else was, either.”

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Dec 03 2009 07:33 AM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

They did battle, though. *Also, Cliffie, Jason Phillips, Piazza, Trachsel and a bunch of others disagree, ass.

bmfc1 Dec 07 2009 08:20 AM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

The Veteran's Committee votes in That SOB Whitey Herzog and Doug "God" Harvey. Nothing for Gil Hodges or Marvin Miller.

Edgy DC Dec 07 2009 08:25 AM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

I think Herzog is a good choice and it's about time an ump got selected. I think Marvin Miller's outsideness really seems to be a misunderstanding over whether he fits inside the categories they feel they should be considering.

Benjamin Grimm Dec 07 2009 08:27 AM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

[quote="Edgy DC":33tguh6n]I think Herzog is a good choice and it's about time an ump got selected. [/quote:33tguh6n] Yeah. I have no beef with either selection.

Benjamin Grimm Dec 07 2009 08:36 AM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

[quote="MLB.com":3l95ii16]Whitey Herzog, a six-time division winner and manager of the 1982 World Series champion St. Louis Cardinals, and Doug Harvey, a five-time World Series umpire, were elected to the National Baseball Hall of Fame by the Veterans Committee for Managers and Umpires, it was announced on Monday. Harvey received 15 of a possible 16 votes. Herzog received 14 votes and longtime Pirates manager Danny Murtaugh received eight. The Veterans Committee for Executives/Pioneers did not elect anyone. Nine votes of a possible 12 were needed. Former Tigers owner John Fetzer received eight votes, former Players Association chief Marvin Miller received seven, former Yankees owner Jacob Ruppert received seven, and former Royals owner Ewing Kauffman received six. [/quote:3l95ii16] So the runners-up of note are Danny Murtaugh, John Fetzer, Marvin Miller, Jacob Ruppert and Ewing Kauffman.

metsguyinmichigan Dec 07 2009 08:58 AM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

My buddy Will's reaction: Herzog? The guy who lost the 1985 World Series, the 1987 World Series (to an 85-77 that was worse than its record) and the 1977 ALCS (when he inexplicably pulled Paul Splittorf in the 8th in Game 5)? Sheesh, the Hall will put anyone in -- as long as he didn't play in the last 40 years. I'm tellin' ya, Miller will go in the year after he dies. Don't want to honor him while he's living.....

MFS62 Dec 07 2009 09:33 AM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

Forget all that other stuff about Herzog. I remember him for going behind the monuments in center field of Yankee Stadium and taking an extra base hit away from Mickey Mantle. It wasn't enough to track and catch the ball, but he had to figure out his route to the ball that included dodging concrete pylons in his path. Amazing. Later PS - The only other guy I remember doing that was Bill Tuttle.

Edgy DC Dec 07 2009 09:49 AM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

Herzog also helped build some of the best Mets teams as a scout and director of player develpment. Referencing his time with the Mets, he was always willing to defend the Chillcott pick even thought it was the guy who got the GM job instead of him, Bob Scheffing, who Reggie Jackson fingered as behind passing him over due to racial anxiety.

batmagadanleadoff Dec 07 2009 10:16 AM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

My favorite Whitey Herzog story occurred almost 38 years ago to the date, when his then employer, the New York Mets, were trying to contact him without much success. Herzog was out in the wilds on some hunting/fishing vacation and was finally located, but not without difficulty. The Mets, it turned out, needed Leroy Stanton's telephone number -- Herzog was the only person who had Stanton's number. When he asked the team what was so important about needing Stanton's number at that moment, the Mets informed Herzog that they had traded the young outfielder to the Angels and wanted to notify Stanton of the trade before the media did. Herzog asked who the Mets were getting in return for Stanton. When he discovered that it was Jim Fregosi, Herzog was disappointed and told the Mets that he wouldn't have traded for Fregosi -- who Herzog described as washed up and overrated even in his prime. Herzog didn't know yet that the Mets also included Nolan Ryan in that trade.

Frayed Knot Dec 07 2009 12:51 PM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

[quote="bmfc1"]The Veteran's Committee votes in That SOB Whitey Herzog and Doug "God" Harvey. Nothing for Gil Hodges or Marvin Miller.

Today's vote release seems to be only for the likes of managers & execs, etc. I think the one for previously bypassed players will be a separate deal.
Remember they re-organized the committees and how they vote a couple years back so it's not just one big vote.

Valadius Dec 07 2009 05:38 PM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

Yes, they rejiggered the Veterans Committee. Now it alternates each year - one year it's players, the next managers, umpires, and officials.

Valadius Jan 01 2010 10:09 AM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

Well, the HOF announcement is days away. Ballots are leaking out by drips and drabs, but it looks like the best chances for induction this year are for Alomar, Dawson, and Blyleven.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Jan 01 2010 11:05 AM Re: That Other Hall of Fame Edited 2 time(s), most recently on Jan 01 2010 01:54 PM

Davidoff's vote* may be the most rational HOF voting slate I've seen this year... or any year. (Is he anyone else's favorite beat guy these days?) *Alomar, Blyleven, Larkin, Raines, Trammell, for those not into clicking through.

MFS62 Jan 01 2010 01:36 PM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

[quote="LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr"]Davidoff's vote* may be the most rational HOF voting slate I've seen this year... or any year. (Is he anyone else's favorite beat guy these days?) *Alomar, Blyleven, Larkin, Raines, Trammell, for those not into clicking through.

I agree with those "yes" votes. Then I clicked on the link. he also voted "yes" for Edgar Martinez.
I wouldn't have. Its about that silly American League rule (I refuse to dignify it by calling it by name, just like Vin Scully refuses to use the phrase "sacrafice fly").

Later

Frayed Knot Jan 01 2010 01:54 PM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

Too many partial seasons for Larkin IMO for him to get my 'Yes', otherwise I'm pretty much down the line with Davidoff. Like his explanation about supporters of Jack Morris claiming he "pitched to the score"; It's funny how only pitchers on strong-hitting teams can 'pitch to the score.' while if you're part of a weak-hitting team, then you might find yourself guilty of pitching 'just well enough to lose.' " just like Vin Scully refuses to use the phrase "sacrafice fly". OK, I give up, why?

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Jan 01 2010 02:01 PM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

Whoopsied that one. I think Martinez is borderline for me... I can see whence you're coming, but he's no Harold Baines. I mean, as Davidoff points out, he put up a .420 OBP with power over 14 seasons, and was about half-again-as-good as your average ML hitter... for his entire career. I have some of the same qualms you do about DHs. But if you're enshrining "closers" for being good at their jobs, then this guy's Mariano for DHs.

Valadius Jan 01 2010 02:49 PM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

I feel like Edgar Martinez may be an important test case if Ryan Howard keeps putting up similar numbers to what he has been putting up in a necessarily shorter career. I don't think you should discriminate against someone simply because they came up to the majors at age 27 or 28 as opposed to 21 or 22.

MFS62 Jan 01 2010 03:05 PM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

[quote="Frayed Knot"] just like Vin Scully refuses to use the phrase "sacrafice fly". OK, I give up, why?

I heard an interview during which he said that if a batter is trying to hit the ball as far as he can, he isn't "giving himself up" , as in the traditional meaning of a sacrafice (bunt). Anyhow, that's his feeling, and so he always uses the term "scoring fly" in that situation.
Later

Frayed Knot Jan 01 2010 03:33 PM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

That's what I figured. There is, however, evidence which says that in SF situations (runner on 3rd, less than two outs) Fly Balls [u:2jp3zqmm]DO[/u:2jp3zqmm] occur at rates greater than random chance - suggesting that there is some element of 'intent' there, of batters maybe going after pitches they know they can lift and produce a run which they might otherwise leave alone. Hence the 'Sacrifice' in both the name and in the scoring (non-AB) mechanism.

Ashie62 Jan 01 2010 04:04 PM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

If MLB creates a position, DH, don't they need to honor it at some point? Then again the NFL won't put in a punter so who knows

Valadius Jan 03 2010 08:47 AM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

From Baseball Think Factory: % Leaderboard after 75 Full Ballots… 86.7 - Alomar 85.3 - Dawson 82.7 - Blyleven 60.0 - Larkin 52.0 - J. Morris 46.7 - T. Raines 45.3 - Edgar 45.3 - Lee Smith 34.7 - McGwire 29.3 - Trammell 21.3 - McGriff 10.7 - D. Murphy 10.7 - Baines 10.7 - Parker 8.0 - Mattingly Top Partial Ballot Leaders… (103 Full/Partials) 75 - Dawson 74 - Alomar 70 - Blyleven I think it's coming down to those three this year, with Larkin on the outside looking in for next year. Raines is receiving a large jump in support, with McGwire receiving a modest bump. Looking ahead, next year, as I said at the time (2005-2006 offseason) will be very interesting. Jeff Bagwell, Rafael Palmeiro, Larry Walker, Juan Gonzalez, and Kevin Brown all appear on the ballot for the first time (as do John Olerud, Al Leiter, and John Franco) which will result in a bit of a glut and possibly some older names falling off the ballot. 2012 quite literally has nobody I'd consider even having a shot at making it in (though MFY fans will whine over Bernie Williams) while 2013 is the granddaddy of them all, featuring Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens, Craig Biggio, Mike Piazza, Curt Schilling, and Sammy Sosa.

Nymr83 Jan 03 2010 10:08 AM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

Will Clemens throw something at Piazza during their induction speeches?

Ashie62 Jan 03 2010 11:11 AM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

[quote="Nymr83":2dpifl7a]Will Clemens throw something at Piazza during their induction speeches?[/quote:2dpifl7a] Yes..handshakes Alomar, Dawson, Blyleven, E. Martinez

Gwreck Jan 03 2010 11:13 AM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

[quote="Valadius":2voyhmbu]Looking ahead, next year, as I said at the time (2005-2006 offseason) will be very interesting. Jeff Bagwell, Rafael Palmeiro, Larry Walker, Juan Gonzalez, and Kevin Brown all appear on the ballot for the first time (as do John Olerud, Al Leiter, and John Franco) which will result in a bit of a glut and possibly some older names falling off the ballot.[/quote:2voyhmbu] How many of those players are actually likely to get in? Palmerio will almost certainly go the way of McGwire. Walker, Gonzalez and Brown are borderline at best. I see Bagwell getting in plus either Larkin or Edgar Martinez, one of the players who misses this year.

Benjamin Grimm Jan 03 2010 11:32 AM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

[quote="Nymr83":k7nx89sx]Will Clemens throw something at Piazza during their induction speeches?[/quote:k7nx89sx] I predict that Clemens will be home in Texas that weekend.

TheOldMole Jan 03 2010 02:47 PM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

Bagwell and Larkin would be my picks.

bmfc1 Jan 03 2010 03:12 PM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

I vote for none of them. If Keith, Gil and Marvin Miller aren't in, then no one else should get in. Childish? Of course but I don't think that any of the nominees are more deserving than those three

Ashie62 Jan 03 2010 03:34 PM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

Maybe Bagwell..but he looked pretty juiced to me

Valadius Jan 03 2010 05:51 PM Re: That Other Hall of Fame

I see Larry Walker as a sure-fire, first-ballot Hall-of-Famer, and I have for years. I remember writing a passionate defense of Walker a few years ago, but don't know where that thread went. I would love to set up a poll for this year's ballot, but with 25 poll options and 26 players, we'd all have to agree on one player to leave out. I nominate David Segui.