Well its always a great topic every year this time. Finally Gossage gets in which just made my signed balled and 8x10 raise in price...NICE!!!
Now the biggest arguments this year include Jim Rice, Andre Dawson, Jack Morris, Bert Blyleven, and Tim Rock Raines...Here are the numbers talk amongst yourselves and post your opinions.
Here is Rice's stat line (392 votes - 72.2):
Rice led the AL in home runs three times (1977, 1978, 1983), in RBI twice (1978, 1983), in slugging percentage twice (1977, 1978), and in total bases four times (1977-1979, 1983). He also picked up Silver Slugger awards in 1983 and 1984 (the award was created in 1980). Rice hit at least 39 home runs in a season four times, had eight 100 RBI seasons, four seasons with 200+ hits and batted over .300 seven times. He finished his 16-year career with a .298 batting average, 382 home runs (52nd best of all-time), 1451 RBIs (51st), 1249 runs scored, 2452 hits (91st), and 4129 total bases (61st). He was an American League All-Star eight times (1977-1980, 1983-1986). In addition to winning the American League MVP award in 1978, he finished in the top 5 in MVP voting five other times (1975, 1977, 1979, 1983, 1986).
Hit .298 / 382 . 2452
Other Notables...do they get in?
Dawson (358 votes - 72.2) - .297 / 438 / 2774 life time
Dawson was as steady a hitter in the '80s as anyone I could remember however I do not think deserving of the Hall.
Jack Morris (233 votes - 42.9) - 254-186 / 3.90 era / SO - 2478
Very dominant ACE in the '80s and has a few rings
Bert Blyleven (336 votes - 43.3) - 287 / 3.31 / 3701
Received more votes than Morris however not as good, pitched a long time but only made 2 all-star teams
Tim Rock Raines (132 votes 24.3) - .294/ 2605 hits / 808 stolen bases
I like Raines and his first half of his career is great, 7 straight all-star appearences, won a NL batting title in '86 with .334 batting average, but its the other 8 or so years that he became more of a role player and his numbes dropped. If you vote this guy in then you gotta put others in.
Now I didn't place him in the notables list but Mattingly is in there as well for me each and every year...we have broken down his numbers which are very similar to Kirby Puckett's a first ballot hall of famer mind you....here is what he got in voting this year - 86 votes for 15.8 percent...thats just unreal in my mind!!!
I left some others out such as Lee Smith, Mark McGuire, Tommy John, Alan Trammell, Dave Parker, Dale Murphy, Harold Baines, David Justice (who got no votes). Please feel free to make a case for these guys as well if you so choose.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
16 comments:
Rice, Mattingly and Morris should be in. Blyleven gave up too many jacks, McGwire didn't hit well for average for most of his career, and the rest will go down as very good players who aren't among the elite.
Bald Man,
I agree along the same lines, to me Rice and Mattingly or no-brainers I am not sure why these guys haven't gotten in already (I may be a little bias of Donny Baseball as he is my favorite all time but still he beats Puckett in certain categories and Puckett was obviously a no brainer to the writers...Aaron and I have come to the conclusion he is right now over Mattingly based on his rings). Now Jack Morris poses a good debate, first off are these writers on crack giving more votes to Blyleven...granted I did not see Blyleven pitch but just from his stat lines he is not as good as Morris whom I saw pitch probably the best post season WS game ever in my mind.
First off Morris is a 5 time All-Star compared to Blyleven's 2. MVP of the '91 series and for a decade or so probably one of the most dominant Ace pitchers in the league.
Now Blyleven is 5th all time in SOs but I equate that to his longevity which is another nice attribute for him. I just don't see where he is more impressive than Morris. Now Morris was a bit of a wild pitcher with that split-finger fast ball and was also shrewd to media at times.
Bottom line though when you were watching this guy pitch you just knew he was a hall of famer, you don't get that with a guy like Blyleven who was a good pitcher, not great hall of fame pitcher.
- Signed OTTO
it always warms my heart when a red sox player, and royal A class A hole like Rice doesn't make it in. F him he was a jerk.
In my mind being totally objective, I think he is borderline, but you have to draw the line somewhere, and maybe it was arbitrarily drawn just above him. The thing about the baseball hof that makes it so much better than the others is how hard it is to get in. A player like Rice in any other sport HOF would easily be in. Don't forget if you lower the bar just slightly to let Rice in, the next guy below him will have the same argument of why he should get in, etc etc. You have to draw the line somewhere. The hall is reserved for only the very best. Rice is close but I don't think quite enough.
In support of Bert . . .
- 287 Wins (26th All-Time)
- 242 Complete Games - think about that - 242 COMPLETE FUCKING GAMES, and then go look at the stat for future Hall of Fame, or should be Hall of Fame pitchers like:
Jack Morris - 175
Clemens - 118
Maddux - 109
Randy Johnson - 98
Schilling - 83
Glavine - 56
Pedro - 46
- Next, note that he threw 60 FUCKING SHUTOUTS [9th All-Time). . . compared to:
Clemens - 44
RJ - 37
Maddux - 35
Morris - 28
Glavine - 25
Schilling - 20
Pedro - 17
Next, note that he pitched 240+ innings in 12 seasons . . .
Morris - 10
Clemens - 8
Maddux -7
RJ - 7
Schill - 4
Glavine - 3
Pedro - 1
How about strikeouts? 5TH ALL-TIME . . . another stat to ponder; out of all of the pitchers who have ever pitched in the Major Leagues, and is FIFTH in the most glamorous pitching stat next to Wins. This stat makes up part of the pitcher's Triple Crown, and might be the equivalent of perhaps HRs . . . why we don't treat this stat with a similar reverence to HRs, Wins, and Hits with regard to "magic" numbers beats the shit out of me . . . think about this, there are 23 players in the 500 HR club, 23 players with 300 wins, and 27 players with 3000 hits . . . guess what? There are only 15 players with 3000 strikeouts, and everyone of them that is retired is in the Hall of Fame . . . the non-retired players? Clemens, Johnson, Maddux, Schilling, Martinez . . . all eventual Hall of Famers (although it will certainly be fun to debate Schills) . . .
Lastly, consider his career Adjusted ERA (Adjusted ERA is probably the best stat to judge a pitcher) of 118 . . . this is better than Jack Morris' (105), the same as Warren Spahn's, and better than the following Hall of Famers:
Gaylord Perry - 117
Steve Carlton(!!!!) - 115
Fergie Jenkins - 115
Nolan Fucking Ryan - 111 (who, in his prime, was easily the wickedest pitcher I've ever seen)
Don Sutton - 108
Catfish Hunter - 104
He also pitched well in the postseason, racking up a 4-1 record with a 2.47 ERA . . .
I think Bert should be in the Hall of Fame.
Here is something I wrote to defend my main man, Dale Murphy, at least in comparison to Rice and Dawson . . . Murphy was one of the classiest ballplayers that ever played the game, and in my mind, that, together with the facts that he was a 2x MVP, a 30-30 guy, a 7x All-Star, a 5x Gold-Glover (playing center-field), perhaps the best all-round player in the game for a 5-year stretch in the 80s, and one of my top 5 favorite players of all-time (ah yes, my personal bias), makes him a Hall of Famer for me . . .
Taking each player's best ten year stretch, this is what I found . . .
Rice ('77-'86)
Games (Avg.) - 147
Runs - 93
HRs - 30
RBIs - 109
OPS+ - 134
SBs - 3
GGs - 0 (Rice was a much better fielder than given credit for, and apparently, deserved at least a few GGs according to some; during this stretch, he was probably slightly above average in left, with as good of an arm as any of his peers)
Postseason - The sampling is probably too small, but he did have a solid WS against the Mets, despite hitting zero HRs)
Dawson ('82-'91)
Games (Avg.) - 144
Runs - 79
HRs - 27
RBIs - 95
OPS+ - 125
SBs - 16
GGs - 6 (in this time frame, 8 overall)(Dawson was arguably a slightly overrated fielder, but had a feared, rocket of an arm, and despite never having eye-popping, Roberto Clemente-type assist totals, was not routinely run on)
Postseason - It would be unfair to call Dawson ineffective in the postseason (during this time frame), as the sample is too small, but he didn't do much in the '89 LCS)
Murphy ('82-'91)
Games (Avg.) - 158
Runs - 92
HRs - 30
RBIs - 95
OPS+ - 127
SBs - 12
GGs - 5 (Murph was a great center-fielder, and showcased a superb arm when sent to right)
Postseason - See Dawson above, but replace "'89" with "'82".
Rice was clearly the most productive offensive performer, with Dawson the best base-stealer, and Murph the most durable, and, in my humble opinion, the best all-round player of the three (in their respective best 10-year stretches, getting bonus points for playing center for 6 of those 10 years).
Although "park factor" is taken into account in OPS+, for those curious, Rice, appeared to have played in the most hitter-friendly ball park for his 10-year stretch, with Murph second, and Dawson having a slightly tougher go than Murph.
As for supporting casts, Rice almost always had some decent talent around him, while Dawson wasn't quite as lucky; Murph, on the third hand, played on some of the worst teams I've ever seen, with only two having winning records in his 10-year stretch.
In a cumulative sense, if Dawson, the pack leader, and Rice fall short, then Murph falls well short. That being said, he did have nearly 2000 less ABs than Dawson, who, in turn, had 1702 more ABs then Rice).
I would probably vote for all three.
Lastly, here is some I wrote while debating the merits of Donnie Baseball with some asshole on another site . . . enjoy . . .
What's up with all this anti-Mattingly bullshit, anyway?
Posed with the following shit points: "Mattingly by the way would of been another Yaz if he had played 20 years! 3-4 great years and 16 average years add up to 3,000 hits and the magic number!
Puckett was consistent year after year and hit .318 lifetime and would of been great for many more years if not for the eye injury! Mattingly didn't do shit after 1988 and even that was a nice year at .311 with 18 homers and 88 ribbies but not HOF like for a first baseman! Those are Keith Hernandez like numbers and while I love Keith, he's not a HOF player!
Mattingly had 4 great years in 1984-87 and a very good year in 1988 and then what else?; I can only respond with the following:
Okay, Mattingly's back problems date back at least to prior to the '89 season (his last great season), and perhaps before that. After '89, the back truly became an issue, and Mattingly was never the same player. So I will hand you back your own statement - "Mattingly was consistent year after year and hit .307 lifetime and would of been great for many more years if not for the back problems!"
Well, with regard to both, you can only say, "Tough sh*t, life sucks", and compare them to each other on their merits as they exist. Remember, if "ifs and buts" were candy and nuts, then everday would be Christmas.
That being said, let's examine their respective careers in the same manner as we did with Yaz.
Kirby Puckett (162 game average/career totals) -
Games: 1783
Runs: 97/1071
HRs: 19/207
RBIs: 99/1085
RPs (runs plus RBIs minus HRs): 177/2156
Career Adjusted OPS: 124
Steals: 12/134
As a fielder, Kirby was terrific - a 6x Gold Glover in center field. Pretty much 'nuff said.
Don Mattingly -
Games: 1785
Runs: 91/1007
HRs: 20/222
RBIs: 100/1099
RPs: 171/2106
Career Adjusted OPS: 127
Steals: 1/14
As a fielder, along with the aforementioned Keith Hernandez, Mattingly was the best defensive first baseman I've ever seen, and a 9x Gold Glover.
Conclusion: Ever see two more statistically similar ball players? Puckett DID play the more important defensive position (CF) and averaged around 10 to 12 stolen bases a year to Mattingly’s 14 career SBs. While Puckett was closer to being a 5-tool player, I thought Mattingly was the more dangerous hitter. In essence, and I think you'd agree with me, injuries truly plagued Mattingly for his entire 90s career.
It is here that perhaps Mattingly should be given even MORE of the benefit of the doubt - while Puckett was essentially healthy for his entire career, until BAM, done, Mattingly played nearly half his career with back problems. DESPITE this, he STILL had similar career averages to Kirby's; in other words, for almost half his career, his career averages were depleted because of the back issues, while nearly ALL of Puckett's years were prime years. Taking this logic further, had Mattingly NOT been plagued by back problems his offensive numbers probably would've surpassed Kirby's by a decent margin.
For about a five year stretch, Mattingly was considered by many to be the best player in the game – this is perhaps his best bargaining chip, and something Puckett cannot really say. At the end of the day, if Puckett’s in, Donny Baseball should be in as well.
If people are leaving Donnie Baseball out simply b/c he was the greatest Yankee of all time not to make the playoffs it's shameful. Should have been in by now.
I also think Murph should get a LOT more consideration than he has. Also one of the best players in his team's long history.
Well 40 minutes until the probable ass-whipping begins...until then Aaron, I forgot how much I missed the F-bombs. But then again I wouldn't expect less from a guy who introduced himself to me Mrs. Fulton's second grade class by flipping me the bird.
Hahahahaha . . . classic . . .
Hey, I was just in Vegas with your boy Lundvall and Noah (seeing Van Halen) . . . hey what d'ya think about joining us in Cleveland this year for our annual mini-reunion? An appearance by M. Daley would bring that fucking house down, plus, we can always use another accomplished beer drinker to assist in our quest for 100 beers at the Jake . . .
You know profanity is incredibly overrated to me . . . in my opinion, the more you use the word, the more you disempower the word . . . which is why I try to use "fuck" as much as possible . . . my wish is to someday hear it on every playground, in every sermon, and during every presidential debate . . . :)
Hey, I just noticed . . . was it your b-day recently? If so, Happy belated . . .
Marcus...you are wasting your time with Bert Blyleven. I can maybe be pursuaded with Dale Murphy and agree totally with Baldo with getting more consideration than he does, but still to me not a hall of famer. Just with what I heard certain baseball writers say and by looking at his stats, Blyleven does not look like a hall of famer. Also are you saying you wouldn't put Morris in the hall, not sure if I missed that or not I don't see any case in your rambling on that tells me you of all people who feel everyone should be in the hall is also putting Morris in the hall???
Otto
You are way off base with your Bert-dissin' . . . I'd probably vote for Morris, but not before Blyleven . . .
I am not off, it's fact...he is probably not going to get in! Call up M and the M Dog see how long you last on the air with your discussion on him getting in...that would probably be pretty funny...'CLICK' Dog: "THANKS FOR THE CALL AARON!!!"
That's cuz they don't wanna hear any stats that DON'T support their narrow-minded views . . . actually, if given enough phone time, I might be able to sway them . . . its not like I'd be opening with, "So what about packaging up Jeter with one of the young pitchers for Santana?"
LOL...
Mike from Staten Island:
"Hey guys now hear me out, what about trading Jeter"....'CLICK'
Dog: "Thanks for the CAAALLL MIIIKE"
Mike: (Chuckle, giggle, belly bouncing up and down)..."I mean come on are these people serious!?!?!"
Have you ever seen this though, this is hilarious M and M Dog moment...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g-xwr-61TQU
Oh yeah . . . I think you were the one that sent that to me before . . . hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha . . .
Post a Comment