When Orel Hersheiser was at his peak, I was just developing my love for the Dodgers and didn’t have a strong sense of baseball as a whole yet. No one in this thread has specifically mentioned why they don’t think Hersheiser is a valid candidate, so I figured I’d ask your opinions on it.
Why isn’t he good enough to be voted in?
Because he had one fantastic year and a few good ones, but not a career of sustained excellence.
Yes, exactly. Dwight Gooden without the blow.
You might as well renounce it now, since Ty Cobb is a charter member of the Hall. He was not only the biggest son of a bitch to play baseball, he also bet on games.
Count me as another who’s memory of Hersheiser is probably rosier than what his career truly merits. That stretch of scoreless innings is still one of those WOW moments that I will always remember though.
Last year I made a strong and loud case for Andre Dawson and it still stands for this season. With guys like McGuire, Caminiti and Canseco on the ballot it should bring into focus just how impressive Dawson’s numbers were in his era and how he is everything those guys aren’t.
Gwynn and Ripken, Jr. are on my ballot too. I go back and forth on Gossage and Lee Smith. The Save is a garbage statistic but that doesn’t mean these guys weren’t valuable and great. My feel is that Goose is in, Smith is out.
It’s hard to argue with 280+ wins, but Gold Gloves are really meaningless.
Ripken is in, Gwynn is in, that’s easy. I’d also say yes to Blyleven and probably Dawson, although with this packed class, they’re both going to have to wait.
Paul O’Neill definitely gets my “heart” vote. I don’t care how many years he spent with the Reds, the man was a true Yankee. (In four years, I’ll say the same thing for Tino Martinez.)
As for McGwire and Canseco - man, has it really been five years since they laid their [del]needles[/del] bats down? - my reasoning is as follows: If you vote for McGwire, about whom nothing was ever proven, how can you vote no for Bonds when nothing is likely to be proven about him? And if I had a vote, I would definitely vote against Bonds. So to be consistent, I’ll say I would vote against both Bash Brothers. Given the way home run totals have inflated, perhaps it’s fair to say that Mac is the new Dave Kingman.
Oh, and then there’s this reason: McGwire and Canseco get top billing in that story because of their crap, and deserving Hall of Famers Ripken and Gwynn got a total of two sentences. That says enough about Mac and Canseco’s impact on baseball, doesn’t it?
One more thing, am I the only one a little caught off guard seeing Devon White’s name on that list? Not sure what about it surprises me more, that he made the ballot or that he’s actually been retired for 5 years already. I think it’s because he and Rondell White will forever be transposed for one another in my recollection.
Maybe they should be combined into an uber-player named Devell White
His line would look pretty soild:
G AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI SB CS BB SO BA OBP SLG TB SH SF IBB HBP GDP
3377 12592 1873 3434 670 105 402 1594 440 145 895 2432 0.2745 0.329 0.442 5520 66 88 53 172 239
I think Ripken and Gwynn also are helped by being ambassdors for the game. Ripken can take credit for helping restore the image of baseball after the strike. Gwynn has been a major part of San Diego area baseball as well.
Harold Baines
Very good for a long time, but sort of akin to Al Oliver or Rusty Staub, neither of whom anyone thinks is a Hall of Famer.
Great player, career a bit too short.
Belle was hated throughout his career because he could be a total prick on a personal level, but he was a hell of a ballplayer. I remember taking in a Blue Jays-Orioles game towards the end of Belle’s career. The dome was open and it was like a zillion degrees, the heat baking off the astroturf. The Orioles were just absolutely getting the shit pounded out of them, as they had the day before and would again the day after and would most of the year. They didn’t look like they knew how to play baseball, or for that matter really cared. No hustle, no talent, no hope. Except for Belle. He was playing all-out 110% with a bad hip. He was the only guy in an Oriole uniform busting his hump. I gained some respect for him that day.
I’m absolutely floored Bichette has been retired for five years. Holy moly. Of course he isn’t a Hall of Famer.
I would vote for him. Just as good a pitcher as Nolan Ryan, and maybe better. I’m sick of him complaining about it though.
Bonilla was much blamed for the horrible Mets teams of the early 90’s after they paid him a bazillion dollars to be the centrepeice of the Worst Team Ever Bought, but as I recall he always tried his best and he was a pretty good hitter. He helped the Marlins win the World Series in 1997. Not a Hall of Famer or anything, though.
Good ol’ Atrocious Brosius. Great defensive player, not a very good hitter, short career, on the ballot more or less as a formality.
Career too short.
Not even close; basically a one-fluke-year guy.
One of the most unlikable players in baseball history, a preening jerk who was too dumb to avoid trouble and apparently did more roids than the East German olympic team. A legitimately great player for awhile but even if you discount his personality he’s not clearly a Hall of Famer, so no.
There are shortstops no better or worse in the Hall of Fame, but at this point I lean no. I would not be upset if he got in someday.
Career too short.
Another very-good-for-a-long-time conundrum. He will get in eventually, because sooner or later people will accuse the BBWAA of being racist if he doesn’t get elected soon, like they did with Tony Perez. I lean no, but I don’t get a vote.
A personal favourite of mine, but not a Hall of Famer.
Another very-good-but-not-quite-great-enough player.
One of those things I just will never understand is why there was such a rush to put Bruce Sutter in the Hall of Fame, but Goose Gossage is still sitting on the outside. Gossage pitched twice as long and was awesome. He had as many great seasons as Sutter did. I’d vote for Gossage.
Like Blyleven, Gossage has taken the opportunity to blast the Hall of Fame for not electing him, which strikes me as being remarkably stupid and selfish. I’d still vote for him, though.
Of course.
Of course not. That 1988 was awesome, but that’s one season.
John pitched a very, very long time, and he was very good. His career accomplishments are similar to Bert Blyleven’s, although they were different KINDS of pitchers. Blyleven was better, however, so for now I’d say no to John.
No.
It’s regrettable that he got hurt but staying healthy is part of being a great player.
McGwire is a tough call, but I have to say yes. He’s not the greatest first baseman ever, but he was good enough to be in the Hall, and absent some retroactive changing of the rules and his status I have to treat him as if the steroid issue isn’t a factor. Unlike Canseco he isn’t a monumental asshole, anyway.
I appreciate that McGwire was basically a one-trick pony, but Marley23’s comparison to Dave Kingman is just bananas. Even if you factor in the difference in offensive levels, Kingman was a bad player, and McGwire was an excellent player. McGwire, as an offensive player, was as good as Jimmie Foxx or Hank Greenberg, or Frank Robinson, albeit in shorter careers than Foxx or Robinson. Kingman wasn’t as good a hitter as Hal Morris. Whether or not you like the guy or want to punish him for his alleged steroid use, whether or not you find the homers-and-walks approach to offense boring, Mark McGwire was an awesome offensive player, well above the standard for a Hall of Famer.
Not great enough.
A magnificent player from 1982 to 1987, and then just kind of collapsed. Similar to Jim Rice, but better with the glove. I say no.
Not great enough.
Snorted his way out of the Hall of Fame. Great, not great enough for enough years.
A popular choice. The reasons why Rice was very, very overrated have been done to death and I’m not going to rehash them, but he was. He was not any better a hitter than Albert Belle. Luis Gonzalez has been just as good a player.
Duh.
An absolutely phenomenal pitcher when healthy; when he was 100% he was every bit the pitcher Roger Clemens or Tom Seaver were. Unfortunately, he was almost never healthy.
Every bit the pitcher Bruce Sutter was, and probably better, over the course of his career. Which makes the Sutter selection even more baffling. I’ll say “no” for now on Smith, though, to advance Gossage’s case.
Trammell would be a decent selection; he had a pretty long career for a shortstop, was a very good offensive player, and a great defender. I’m not going to say yes just now but I would not be upset if he got it someday.
White, of course, was one of the greatest defensive outfielders of all time. His offense was chancy; he struck out way too much.
When White was traded from California to Toronto in 1991 for Junior Felix, Toronto fans were outraged. Felix was a great prospect; White was not, and had a reputation for being a surly jerk.
Upon his arrival in Toronto, White played great ball for five years and never said a bad word to anyone. Felix, meanwhile, got hurt and sort of drifted out of baseball.
I’m shocked Witt made the ballot. Witt had great stuff but no control at all; he couldn’t hit Chicago if he jumped off the Sears Tower.
So my choices are:
Cal Ripken
Tony Gwynn
Goose Gossage
Bert Blyleven
Mark McGwire
Everyone claims Cobb bet on games and yet the proof is never offered. He might have been a son of a bitch but he was a great ballplayer, and the accusations he bet on games are vague at best.
The proof Rose bet on games is incontrovertible. He made his bed and now he’s gotta lie in it, and to be honest I cannot understand why anyone would WANT to see him elected; in addition to breaking the most important rule baseball has, he spent 16 years lying about it, attacking the reputations of honest men, and lying to and manipulating good people who thought they were helping a wronged man, and then only admitting the truth when he thought he could make some more money at it. I hope he spends his entire worthless, stinking life begging for induction and getting the door slammed in his face.
RickJay:
The reason he was so overlooked is because he was always overshadowed within his own league. When he was in the A.L., he was behind Rollie Fingers and later, Dan Quisenberry; in his few N.L. seasons, he was behind Sutter. Voters remember who the “top firemen” were year after year, and good as the Goose was, it was seldom him.
The purpose of the comparison - although I grant that most of the people in this thread know way more about baseball than I do - was not McGwire’s ability vs. Kingman’s ability. Before Kingman, as I understand it, hitting 400 home runs got you into the Hall. I was saying McGwire may be the first man to hit 500 and not get in, since Fred McGriff washed out at 493. That’d be the first official recognition that 500 homers isn’t what it used to be, and I was saying that McGwire, like Kingman, would change where the barrier is.
Based on that condition, the person going to the Hall of Fame should be Dr. Frank Jobe.
Putting Tommy John in the Hall because of the surgery would be like awarding the winning trophy in a barbecue contest to the cow.
Your analysis both underestimates Ripken’s stats and ignores the importance of the non-statistical aspects of his career.
Not only were his numbers good (the compare pretty well to a few other Hall of Fame players), but he also changed the way that Major League baseball, and the fans, thought about the position of shortstop.
He won AL Rookie of the Year (1982), two ML Player of the Year (1983, 1991), two Gold gloves (1991, 1992), and did very respectably in a bunch of other offensive categories.
You seem to be implying that, without the streak, he’d have trouble making it into the Hall. Sure, the streak and his self-effacing attitude make him a perennial favorite of crowds and the media, and will ensure that he’s almost a certainty for a first ballot selection, but i reckon he would have gone to Cooperstown even without the streak.
I love the way you summed up this scumbag of a human but great baseball player. He has ruined an incredible reputation and destroyed all hope of any rational human supporting him at this point. I cannot conceive of why anyone wants him in the hall.
However, off to Cobb, I pulled up some pretty good reports on Cobb in a prior thread last year. I will try to find it again. It does not matter how dirty Cobb was, this should not affect Rose’s eligibility anyway.
This is the thread on Rose where I presented some fairly credible proof of Cobbs betting. I am surprised you missed this one RickJay, you usually beat me to baseball threads and come armed with superior knowledge to boot. I always look forward to your baseball posts. They are usually educational.
Jim
When McGwire lied in front of congress , he lost my vote. Ripkin is a sure thing and should be since his record breaking was so heavily promoted.I really like Mattingly and he was a 307 lifetime hitter. As time goes by and more borderliners squeek in, a 300 lifetime gets bigger. Gossage had a time when he was almost unhittable. There are arguments possible for almost everyone there. It is a tough year.
I would argue that they are not meaningless. Jim Kaat was the best fielding pitcher in the American League for 16 consecutive years. Ask Herb Score how important fielding is for pitchers.
Given the 280 wins and being the best fielding pitcher ever you’d think he would be a lock, especially when you consider how many people made the Hall on the strength of their defense only. Take Ozzie Smith, for example. The guy couldn’t hit with a tennis racquet, but man was he awesome at defense. You could even say much the same about Brooks Robinson. He was far from the best hitting third baseman, but he was (and remains) unrivaled with the glove.
As I see it Jim Kaat has a hell of a lot to recommend himself. 50 more wins than Whitey Ford, for instance, all with much crappier teams. A hell of a lot more wins than Koufax. A far more complete player than Nolan Ryan. To me, there’s no question.
Fielding is important, but the Gold Glove isn’t a reliable measure of fielding performance. All the Gold Glove indicates is that a majority of managers and coaches think of the winner as having a reputation as a good fielder, even if he has a horrible year.
Hell, Rafael Palmeiro once won a Gold Glove in a season where he had 28 games at 1B and 135 games at DH. Do you really think that 28 games at 1B is enough of a sample to determine if a guy is the best fielder in the league at his position?
**What Exit?, ** thanks for the link. I’ll have a look at that.
Jim Kaat won 16 consecutive Gold Glove. He absolutely was NOT the best fielding pitcher in the league for 16 years; he kept winning Gold Gloves in large part because the people who vote on the award (managers and coaches) don’t really care about it and tend to vote for whomever won last year.
In fact, in many of those years Kaat had BAD years with the glove. In 1969 he made 8 errors in just 44 chances, an atrocious season by any standard; he was brutal with the glove that year, but they gave him the Gold Glove. In 1972 he pitched in just 15 games, being injured most of the season, and did not do anything spectacular as a fielder, and they still gave him the Gold Glove. The voters simply didn’t give a crap and weren’t paying attention.
In all honestly, I don’t think Kaat was the best fielding pitcher of all time, or even close to it; he actually made a surprisingly large number of errors, with a below-average fielding percentage, and pitcher is the one position where the number of errors you make actually has a very great impact on how valuable your fielding is. Early in his career he was exceptionally mobile and great at covering first but after six or seven years he wasn’t any better than anyone else. Greg Maddux (who has also won 16 Gold Gloves and also did not deserve them all) has certainly been better than Kaat was.
This is the “My Dad Can Beat Up Your Little Brother” argument. Yes, Kaat won more games than Ford or Koufax; Ford and Koufax are not in the Hall of Fame for their career wins, they’re in for achieving a level of dominance Kaat never even approached. And being a better fielder than Nolan Ryan is not exactly a huge recommendation for the Hall of Fame. Ryan was a better pitcher, in a longer career, than Jim Kaat. It’s like arguing that Fred Lynn should be in the Hall of Fame because he hit more home runs than Ty Cobb or Tris Speaker and was a better all around player than Lou Gehrig.
Herb Score? Ask Jim Leyland! He has an exceptional win total, but the prevailing logic these days is that wins are not the best indicator of a pitcher’s ability.
If Kaat was as awesome defensively as Ozzie Smith, this would be a very short argument. Although pitchers never dominate defensively the way position players can.
I have a hunch there will be exactly two electees this year: Tony Gwynn and Cal Ripken Jr.
Why ONLY two? Because those two guys, rightly or wrongly, are perceived as embodying all that was good and wholesome in the game. Few voters would want to sully their induction by adding someone like Mark McGwire to the list.
Finally… I was a Twins fan as a kid, I liked Jim Kaat, and wouldn’t be outraged if he got in, but I just don’t think he’s deserving. As for his defensive abilities… look, the Gold Glove is often a joke at positions where people pay a lot of attention to fielding (I love Derek Jeter, but there’s no way he’s the best defensive shortstop in the A.L., when he isn’t even the best defensive shortstop on the Yankees’ roster!), and it’s amn ABSOLUTE joke at positions like pitcher.
I’m not saying Jim Kaat wasn’t a pretty good fielder, but I AM saying I never once saw him make a great defensive play. (Heck, I’ve hardly EVER seen ANY pitcher make a great play in the field!) Chances are, none of the sportswriters who voted to give him all those Gold Gloves every year ever saw him make a great defensive play, either. Most likely, he got a reputation for being a good defensive pitcher early on, and writers just kept on voting for him out of habit.
Well, you either just submarined Cal Ripken there or put Dawson in the hall. Pick one. In your link it pretty definitively shows that Dawson’s offensive stats were significantly better than Ripken’s when adjusted for number of at bats, and Dawson surpasses him on the whole without the adjustment by a fair margin. The only place where Ripken edges him is OBP and that’s not a wide margin. Dawson just killed him in the SB category and Dawson was a substantially better fielder.
Everyone seems to agree that Ripken is a no-brainer first ballot inductee, so either they are insane for omitting Dawson or Ripken is getting in almost wholly on the merits of his streak.
Comparing Gwynn to Dawson is perhaps even more lopsided in Dawson’s favor depending on how much merit you put on BA and OBP with zero power and zero speed. The fact they played the same position, and Dawson played it better, is notable.