PDA

View Full Version : Johnny Damon, HOF?!



Highlifeman21
05-01-2006, 06:48 PM
On PTI this afternoon, Kornheiser said sincerely that Johnny Damon is going to the HOF. Off the top of my head, I can't believe this is anywhere near remotely true. What do you think? Johnny Damon, HOF?

Before looking up some stats, I gotta say no, but I could be wrong. How about you?

Joseph
05-01-2006, 06:49 PM
Not only no, but hell no. He doesn't even get honorable mention IMO.

KronoRed
05-01-2006, 06:52 PM
Not even close, he's more hype.

BRM
05-01-2006, 06:52 PM
Are you sure Kornheiser was serious?

redsfanmia
05-01-2006, 06:53 PM
He played for the Red Sox and now plays for the Yankees, doesn't that automatically make him a hall of famer?

vaticanplum
05-01-2006, 06:54 PM
To date he's never been injury-prone, so could have a good 8-10 years left as a best-case scenario. Who knows what could happen. As it stands right now, absolutely not.

griffeyfreak4
05-01-2006, 06:54 PM
:laugh:
:laugh:
:laugh:

Wow, a .290 batting average, combined with a .353. OBP and a .786 OPS is sure HOF material.

KronoRed
05-01-2006, 06:55 PM
He played for the Red Sox and now plays for the Yankees, doesn't that automatically make him a hall of famer?
He needs to follow the Boggs mold and go play for the D-rays.

redsfanmia
05-01-2006, 06:56 PM
:thumbup:
He needs to follow the Boggs mold and go play for the D-rays.

Highlifeman21
05-01-2006, 06:57 PM
Are you sure Kornheiser was serious?


In the context he said it, unfortunately yes. Wilbon immediately questioned him, but then was sidetracked with the whole hype of the Yanks/Sox series. If he were to ever make it into the HOF, he'd no doubt have to go in as a KC Royal!

redsfanmia
05-01-2006, 07:03 PM
Are you sure Kornheiser was serious?
He is fat, bald, and orange ofcourse he is serious.

blumj
05-01-2006, 07:24 PM
He played for the Red Sox and now plays for the Yankees, doesn't that automatically make him a hall of famer?
Add Scott Boras, and stir.

TC81190
05-01-2006, 07:29 PM
Black Ink: Batting - 6 (322) (Average HOFer ~ 27)
Gray Ink: Batting - 63 (384) (Average HOFer ~ 144)
HOF Standards: Batting - 24.3 (494) (Average HOFer ~ 50)
HOF Monitor: Batting - 60.0 (292) (Likely HOFer > 100)
Overall Rank in parentheses.

KoryMac5
05-01-2006, 07:29 PM
He is not even close to any of the magic numbers you need to be mentioned in the HOF discussion. I like Tony's banter with Wilbon but sports is not his strong point.

MattyHo4Life
05-01-2006, 07:37 PM
Jim Edmonds deserves to be in the HOF a lot more than Johnny Damon does.

RedsBaron
05-01-2006, 07:46 PM
Jim Edmonds deserves to be in the HOF a lot more than Johnny Damon does.
True. Damon isn't close to being a Hall of Famer at this point, and is unlikely to endure long eonough to reach career numbers that would give him any realistic chance at induction.

membengal
05-01-2006, 07:50 PM
He played for the Red Sox and now plays for the Yankees, doesn't that automatically make him a hall of famer?

That is known as using the ESPN BBTN exemption...

westofyou
05-01-2006, 08:09 PM
On PTI this afternoon, Kornheiser said sincerely that Johnny Damon is going to the HOF. Is he taking the turnpike?

Ravenlord
05-01-2006, 08:11 PM
maybe if Damon's rookie year had occured in 1999 and thus was in his mid-late 20's now...

when he starts to decline, it's going to be very quick and ugly.

M2
05-01-2006, 08:18 PM
Damon, literally, would need 3,000 hits to make the HOF. He's only got 1,182 to go. If he kept up his hit pace from the past eight seasons (and that's no easy feat for a guy in his 30s), he could reach it in 6.5 seasons. Unless and until that happens, he's got a weak candidacy.

Astrobuddy
05-01-2006, 10:49 PM
The Hall of Fame of HAIR maybe, MAAAYBE.

Fullboat
05-01-2006, 11:16 PM
On PTI this afternoon, Kornheiser said sincerely that Johnny Damon is going to the HOF. Off the top of my head, I can't believe this is anywhere near remotely true. What do you think? Johnny Damon, HOF?

Before looking up some stats, I gotta say no, but I could be wrong. How about you?


:D Only if he buys tickets.

indyred
05-02-2006, 01:08 AM
Nope....not unless he has 8 more years of good/great #'s....or is huge in the postseason a few more times......does Schilling make the HOF ? I think his post season play gets him there with his rings......

realistic
05-02-2006, 01:31 AM
Damon is 3.5 years YOUNGER than Edmonds with 180 MORE hits.

4 postseasons for Damon vs 5 for Edmonds.

Power numbers? not close
Speed numbers? not close either

Edmonds over 100 RBI 4 times
Damon over 100 Runs 8 times

ETA of retirement (my guess) Edmonds 2 more years, Damon 7

Id say unless Damon gets 3000 hits he probably wont get in, and he shouldnt as it is now..but hes got a legit shot at that with 3-4 'peakish' years left to produce numbers and shine in October as a Yankee. Id wager on his chances over Edmonds without a doubt. Edmonds has the gold gloves, but in voters eyes world series appearances weigh more than gold gloves

Personally, I dont like either one of them, I'm just being realistic as an investor in sports memorabilia. Its pretty obvious who are hof'ers - right now neither are - but Damon has a chance that Edmonds dont have unless Edmonds plays till hes 42-43 productively - dont see that , hes too fragile.

BCubb2003
05-02-2006, 01:57 AM
He's famous enough ...

Jpup
05-02-2006, 05:55 AM
silly question. :help:

redsmetz
05-02-2006, 07:07 AM
My reaction is it's way too early to say. I looked at the Similar Players listing on baseball-reference.com and it was about what I expected - some good players but not HOF'ers. I'd concur with M2 that if he can continue to put up good numbers thru the rest of his career, he might be considered, but it's way to early.

Here's the list:


Johnny Damon Similar Player

1. Augie Galan (908)
2. Garry Maddox (908)
3. Dom DiMaggio (901)
4. Kip Selbach (891)
5. Gregg Jefferies (890)
6. Pete Fox (890)
7. Sam West (888)
8. Claudell Washington (884)
9. Gee Walker (884)
10. Jose Cardenal (881)

RedsBaron
05-02-2006, 07:25 AM
Nope....not unless he has 8 more years of good/great #'s....or is huge in the postseason a few more times......does Schilling make the HOF ? I think his post season play gets him there with his rings......
Schilling is probably on his way to the HOF. He has a score of 40 on the black ink test (average HOF score is 40), a score of 195 on the gray ink test (average HOF score is 185), a score of 43 on the HOF standards test (average HOF score is 50), and a HOF Monitor score of 151 (average HOF member has a score of 100)-these are all numbers through 2005. His scores in these areas will probably go up, particularly since he is close to achieving both the 200 win and 3000 strikeout career marks.
Going into 2006, Schilling had a career record of 192-131, a .594%, with 2832 K's and a 3.40 ERA. He is a three time 20 game winner, twice leading the league in wins. He has fanned 300+ batters in three different seasons, twice leading the league.
Add in the World Series appearances with three different teams, with great performances in all three Series, along with the legend of the bloody sock in the 2004 Series, and the fact he is still going strong, and you have a pretty good case that Schilling is eventually Cooperstown bound.

Cyclone792
05-02-2006, 08:12 AM
Johnny Damon is a league average hitter that steals bases so he will have to stick around forever to make the Hall of Fame. Now, Curt Schilling, on the other hand ... well ...



Player Wins Losses Innings ERA LgERA ERA+

Kevin Brown 211 144 3256.1 3.28 4.16 127
Curt Schilling 192 131 2906.0 3.40 4.34 128

Top Five ERA+ Seasons
Brown: 214, 169, 167, 160, 150
Schilling: 159, 154, 150, 150, 143

Those are Schilling's numbers entering this season, and he is off to a nice start this season so far. In an interview earlier in the season he stated he was going to pitch this season and next, then retire after the 2007 season. If he has two solid seasons then he should pass Brown up in career value, though it'll still be close. Schilling does have those magical playoff performances, but Brown has Schilling topped in overall regular season peak value.

RedsBaron
05-02-2006, 08:35 AM
Kevin Brown had a nice career, but, unlike Schilling, he didn't put together a career with the sparkles and bling-bling that will probably impress HOF voters. His black ink score is only 19, whereas Schilling met the HOF pitcher average score of 40. Brown's gray ink score of 166 is slightly under the average HOF score of 185, whereas Schilling had a 195. The two are very close in their HOF standards score, with Brown at 41, Schilling at 43, and the average score of 50. However, Schilling absolutely blows Brown away in the HOF Monitor comparsion. Brown has a score of 93, just under the 100 score of the average member of the HOF, while Schilling has a score of 151, well above the 130 level where a player becomes virtually certain, based upon the historical voting record, of being inducted.
Brown was a good pitcher, twice leading the league in ERA, but he had but one 20 win season, whereas Schilling has thus far had three.
Schilling will also probably gain HOF votes for a couple of other factors. First, his performances in the postseason, especially the 2001 and 2004 World Series, may be seen as the stuff of legend. He was great in the D'Backs' 2001 victory, and the bloody sock performance bringing Boston its first title in 86 years will probably gain him a bunch of votes. Brown doesn't have legendary post-season performances that compare with those of Schilling.
Second, while quite a few fans dislike Schilling, he can be engaging and quotable, which probably won't hurt him with the writers who do the voting, whereas Kevin Brown....well, maybe his mother likes him.

Cyclone792
05-02-2006, 09:13 AM
The only reason Schilling blows Brown away in HOF monitor is because of 1) wins, which are teammate dependent, and 2) strikeouts. Schilling racked up the strikeout totals in several seasons so he's going to rack up the points in the HOF monitor, whereas Brown didn't strike nearly as many guys out.

One key stat that's not included in the HOF monitor that Brown blows Schilling away is home runs allowed. Brown gave up only 0.57 HR/9 innings in his career while Schilling sits at 0.93 HR/9 innings.

Schilling's got the postseason glory, but other than that these guys are very very similar, and Brown had quite a bit of postseason glory himself in helping drag the Padres to the NL Pennant in 1998. I really do hope Schilling finishes his career with two outstanding peak seasons, say 40+ wins with a sub 3.00 ERA each season, as that would help enable him to separate himself a bit from Brown, and I do believe he's still capable of putting those numbers up.

But if he goes out merely being an average to above average pitcher these last two seasons, then quite honestly there won't be much difference at all between his case and Brown's case. I do agree that the writers will see Schilling as the vastly superior pitcher of the two, but right now in reality it's simply not the case.

M2
05-02-2006, 10:27 AM
The only reason Schilling blows Brown away in HOF monitor is because of 1) wins, which are teammate dependent, and 2) strikeouts. Schilling racked up the strikeout totals in several seasons so he's going to rack up the points in the HOF monitor, whereas Brown didn't strike nearly as many guys out.

One key stat that's not included in the HOF monitor that Brown blows Schilling away is home runs allowed. Brown gave up only 0.57 HR/9 innings in his career while Schilling sits at 0.93 HR/9 innings.

Schilling's got the postseason glory, but other than that these guys are very very similar, and Brown had quite a bit of postseason glory himself in helping drag the Padres to the NL Pennant in 1998. I really do hope Schilling finishes his career with two outstanding peak seasons, say 40+ wins with a sub 3.00 ERA each season, as that would help enable him to separate himself a bit from Brown, and I do believe he's still capable of putting those numbers up.

But if he goes out merely being an average to above average pitcher these last two seasons, then quite honestly there won't be much difference at all between his case and Brown's case. I do agree that the writers will see Schilling as the vastly superior pitcher of the two, but right now in reality it's simply not the case.

I'd argue Kevin Brown probably should go to the HOF. He was better than guys like Don Drysdale and Catfish Hunter. His problem is that he's such an atrocious human that no one's going to vote for him. Meanwhile Schilling, who will have a similar resume, will be a mortal lock. Some of that is postseason notoriety, but more of it is personality. John Smoltz will probably have his day in Cooperstown for similar reasons -- combination of good citizen and deserving it.

BTW, Smoltz and Schilling touch upon my ongoing crusade to count postseason stats as part of a player's career stats.

For instance, the line on Smoltz is that he needs 200 wins to get serious consideration for the HOF (to go with his 154 saves). His official win total is at 178, but that doesn't include the 15 games he's won in the postseason. Add that in and he's at 193 and Cooperstown now becomes a short putt.

In fact, he's 15-4 with a 2.66 ERA in 206.2 October IP. Those are the most important games he ever pitched. They most certainly counted for something. The records have been kept and yet they aren't being factored into his total resume. It would lower his overall ERA from 3.26 to 3.22 and push him up over 2,750 Ks as well.

Curtis Montague Schilling, if you count his postseason wins, now sits at 204 instead of 196 and his K total would be 2,976 instead of 2,872. His career ERA would drop from 3.40 to 3.35.

MLB needs to stop treating postseason ball as some sort of nebulous style points designation and start giving full credit for what's been done there.

Johnny Footstool
05-02-2006, 10:35 AM
He's famous enough ...

Icing, but no cake.

Cyclone792
05-02-2006, 11:19 AM
I'd argue Kevin Brown probably should go to the HOF. He was better than guys like Don Drysdale and Catfish Hunter. His problem is that he's such an atrocious human that no one's going to vote for him. Meanwhile Schilling, who will have a similar resume, will be a mortal lock. Some of that is postseason notoriety, but more of it is personality. John Smoltz will probably have his day in Cooperstown for similar reasons -- combination of good citizen and deserving it.

BTW, Smoltz and Schilling touch upon my ongoing crusade to count postseason stats as part of a player's career stats.

For instance, the line on Smoltz is that he needs 200 wins to get serious consideration for the HOF (to go with his 154 saves). His official win total is at 178, but that doesn't include the 15 games he's won in the postseason. Add that in and he's at 193 and Cooperstown now becomes a short putt.

In fact, he's 15-4 with a 2.66 ERA in 206.2 October IP. Those are the most important games he ever pitched. They most certainly counted for something. The records have been kept and yet they aren't being factored into his total resume. It would lower his overall ERA from 3.26 to 3.22 and push him up over 2,750 Ks as well.

Curtis Montague Schilling, if you count his postseason wins, now sits at 204 instead of 196 and his K total would be 2,976 instead of 2,872. His career ERA would drop from 3.40 to 3.35.

MLB needs to stop treating postseason ball as some sort of nebulous style points designation and start giving full credit for what's been done there.

Good post, M2, and I agree on all counts. IMO, Schilling, Smoltz and Brown are all deserving Hall of Famers, but personality and relationships with the writers will put Schilling and Smoltz in while leaving Brown out. Tack on Brown's postseason stats and his ERA might go up a tick, but he adds on five more wins to his career total.

Mike Mussina is another guy near that same class of pitchers as those three. Moose has 224 regular season wins in over 3,000 innings and a 125 ERA+. Tack on his postseason stats, 7-7 with a 3.30 ERA in 128 innings, and he entered this season with 231 wins. People like look at his 3.64 ERA and never having a 20 win season and claim that Moose isn't Hall caliber, but he's been a greater pitcher than many, many guys already in the Hall when you consider the offensive era he's pitched in.

All of this brings up another interesting observation in that the 300 game winner may nearly become extinct for a long while. Only Johnson and Glavine have a decent shot at joining Clemens and Maddux, and after those the list is dry. Perhaps if Pedro continues to defy the odds of his arm falling off has a chance, and maybe Pettitte if he can pitch well into his late 30s and early 40s has a slim chance.

It very well could be time for Hall voters to re-examine the value they place on win totals, because 230 wins in today's era is much more impressive than 230 wins 30 years ago.

westofyou
05-02-2006, 11:26 AM
If Kevin Brown gets in he better be bring Billy Pierce with him.

M2
05-02-2006, 11:57 AM
If Kevin Brown gets in he better be bring Billy Pierce with him.

Pierce was a fine pitcher, but Brown pitched better in a sick offensive era.

RedsBaron
05-02-2006, 02:13 PM
I'd argue Kevin Brown probably should go to the HOF. He was better than guys like Don Drysdale and Catfish Hunter. His problem is that he's such an atrocious human that no one's going to vote for him. Meanwhile Schilling, who will have a similar resume, will be a mortal lock. Some of that is postseason notoriety, but more of it is personality. John Smoltz will probably have his day in Cooperstown for similar reasons -- combination of good citizen and deserving it.

BTW, Smoltz and Schilling touch upon my ongoing crusade to count postseason stats as part of a player's career stats.


I agree that post-season performance definitely needs to be considered in HOF voting.
I found it interesting that you mentioned Drysdale and Hunter in a discussion about Brown and Schilling. I looked up Drysdale on BaseballReference.com. It listed the ten most similar pitchers to Drysdale. I'll list them all along with their similarity scores as compared to Drysdale, their career won-loss marks, and their HOF Monitor scores:
Don Drysdale------------------------209-166; HOF Monitor 131
Milt Pappas------940 similarity score; 209-164; HOF Monitor 37
Kevin Brown-----928---------------; 211-144;-------------93
Catfish Hunter---926---------------; 224-166;-------------131.5
Vida Blue--------914---------------; 209-161;------------114
Luis Tiant-------913---------------; 229-172;-------------97
Rube Marquard--907---------------; 201-177;-------------84
Wilbur Cooper---906---------------; 216-178;-------------76
Oral Hershiser---900---------------; 204-150;-------------90.5
Jim Bunning-----899---------------; 224-184;-------------92
Billy Pierce------895---------------; 211-169;-------------87.5

Drysdale, Hunter, Marquard and Bunning are all in the HOF. Marquard, at the veryleast, should not have been inducted, and I would have voted for Tiant before I voted for Hunter.
BTW, I do not endorse the idea of simply looking at won-loss records, similarity scores, or even the HOF Monitor in determining whether or not a player is Hall worthy. I just found the comparsion of interest, especially since it mentioned many of the pitchers under consideration.

RedsBaron
05-02-2006, 02:20 PM
While I don't have the time to go into detail, the ten most similar pitchers to Schilling are:
David Cone
Dazzy Vance
Dwight Gooden
Kevin Brown
Jimmy Key
John Candelaria
Lon Warnelke
Mike Cuellar
Mike Mussina
Bob Welch

I believe that Vance is the only one presently in the HOF.

M2
05-02-2006, 04:25 PM
While I don't have the time to go into detail, the ten most similar pitchers to Schilling are:
David Cone
Dazzy Vance
Dwight Gooden
Kevin Brown
Jimmy Key
John Candelaria
Lon Warnelke
Mike Cuellar
Mike Mussina
Bob Welch

I believe that Vance is the only one presently in the HOF.

Though it should be noted that while those guys may be the most similar, none of the qualifies as that close a match. Schilling's an odd bird. I consider him to be a modern Robin Roberts myself.