PDA

View Full Version : RedsZone's 2011 Hall of Fame Induction



camisadelgolf
11-30-2010, 11:02 AM
Who deserves to be inducted into the Baseball Hall of Fame? On your ballot, please vote for no more than 10 different players. And please--no write-in votes (sorry, Pete).

camisadelgolf
11-30-2010, 11:12 AM
Is it safe to assume that if someone doesn't vote for Bagwell, it's due to allegations of cheating?

camisadelgolf
11-30-2010, 11:17 AM
Chip, I'm just curious--why did you pick John Franco over Lee Smith?

Chip R
11-30-2010, 11:19 AM
Chip, I'm just curious--why did you pick John Franco over Lee Smith?


Probably because he was a Red and one of my favorite players.

camisadelgolf
11-30-2010, 11:20 AM
Probably because he was a Red and one of my favorite players.
Ah, okay. Speaking of homerism, I can't wait to see what happens if someone here doesn't vote for Larkin.

redsfandan
11-30-2010, 11:39 AM
Hmmm ... no Rafael Palmeiro or Juan Gonzalez. Such a shame. ;)

And I was really looking forward to voting for Dan Wilson. :(

It's the last year on the ballot for Parker so I imagine he'll see a bump in votes that still won't be nearly enough to get him into the HOF.

Slyder
11-30-2010, 11:48 AM
Ah, okay. Speaking of homerism, I can't wait to see what happens if someone here doesn't vote for Larkin.

I call for the revocation of their fan card! j/k.

camisadelgolf
11-30-2010, 12:04 PM
It's criminal to me that Jack Morris is getting more votes than Kevin Brown.
http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/m/morrija02.shtml
http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/b/brownke01.shtml

I guess this is another case of homerism since Jack Morris once signed a contract with the Reds.

redsfandan
11-30-2010, 12:13 PM
For what it's worth, this is how the holdovers did on last years ballot:

Year %
on of
Player Ballot vote

Bert Blyleven 13th 74.2%
Roberto Alomar 1st 73.7%
Jack Morris 11th 52.3%
Barry Larkin 1st 51.6%
Lee Smith 8th 47.3%
Edgar Martinez 1st 36.2%
Tim Raines 3rd 30.4%
Mark McGwire 4th 23.7%
Alan Trammell 9th 22.4%
Fred McGriff 1st 21.5%
Don Mattingly 10th 16.1%
Dave Parker 14th 15.2%
Dale Murphy 12th 11.7%
Harold Baines 4th 6.1%

redsfandan
11-30-2010, 12:18 PM
It's criminal to me that Jack Morris is getting more votes than Kevin Brown.
http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/m/morrija02.shtml
http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/b/brownke01.shtml

I guess this is another case of homerism since Jack Morris once signed a contract with the Reds.

OR maybe it's just because Morris is more likely to get the votes. The Hall of Fame Monitor* (it's at the bottom of both of those player pages) for Morris is 122 while it's 93 for Brown.

* This measure attempts to determine how likely a player is to be elected. It is a rough scale with over 100 likely and under 100 less likely.

RichRed
11-30-2010, 12:27 PM
I voted for the ones I feel should be absolute locks: Larkin, Blyleven, and Raines. I can see arguments for several others but those three stand out the most to me.

OnBaseMachine
11-30-2010, 01:12 PM
I voted for Alomar, Bagwell, Blyleven, Larkin, and Edgar Martinez. I meant to vote for Tim Raines too but I clicked the submit button too soon.

edabbs44
11-30-2010, 01:16 PM
It's criminal to me that Jack Morris is getting more votes than Kevin Brown.
http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/m/morrija02.shtml
http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/b/brownke01.shtml

I guess this is another case of homerism since Jack Morris once signed a contract with the Reds.

Brown's likely use of PEDs might be a reason.

camisadelgolf
11-30-2010, 01:24 PM
nemesis is the only person not to vote for Larkin. What gives, nemesis?

RedsBaron
11-30-2010, 01:39 PM
It's the last year on the ballot for Parker so I imagine he'll see a bump in votes that still won't be nearly enough to get him into the HOF.

Yeara ago in my mind I placed Dave Parker and Dale Murphy in a group with Jim Rice and Andre Dawson. They were contemporaries, all played the outfield, each won a MVP award (Murphy had two), each lead his league in RBI at least once, three of the four were home run champions while Parker compensated with a pair of batting titles, and all four were borderline HOF candidates.
There are worse outfielders in the HOF than these four, but their qualifications for the honor are not overwhelming. Among the four I could not decide than one was particularly more qualified for the honor than the other three.
I do not favor the game of since the HOF inducted Fred Lindstrom as a third baseman let's induct Darrell Evans, or since the HOF inducted Lloyd Waner let's induct Vada Pinson. Yes, Evans and Pinson were better players than were Lindstrom and Waner, but they were from different eras and the mistakes made with Lindstrom and Waner being inducted does not persuade me to let Evans and Pinson in.
However, in the case of Parker and Murphy, the HOF in its wisdom has decided to induct two of their direct contemporaries, and I cannot say that Dawson and Rice were better players than Parker and Murphy (none of the four were as good as another contemporary outfielder, Tim Raines). Therefore I am voting to induct Parker and Murphy this time around.

*BaseClogger*
11-30-2010, 02:34 PM
It's criminal to me that Jack Morris is getting more votes than Kevin Brown.
http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/m/morrija02.shtml
http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/b/brownke01.shtml

I guess this is another case of homerism since Jack Morris once signed a contract with the Reds.

Jack Morris had a lot more Clubhouse Points.

What's the deal with Kevin Brown? Did he make a deal with the devil or something (looking at that K/9 spike)?

*BaseClogger*
11-30-2010, 02:35 PM
I voted for Blyleven, Larkin, Raines, Alomar, and McGwire without looking at any statistics. I guess if I vote McGwire in then I should have also voted for Bagwell, alwell.

Why does Alomar get so few votes? Dude was the complete package...

camisadelgolf
11-30-2010, 02:48 PM
I voted for Blyleven, Larkin, Raines, Alomar, and McGwire without looking at any statistics. I guess if I vote McGwire in then I should have also voted for Bagwell, alwell.

Why does Alomar get so few votes? Dude was the complete package...
Part of it might come from spitting on an umpire toward the end of his career.

*BaseClogger*
11-30-2010, 02:49 PM
Part of it might come from spitting on an umpire toward the end of his career.

That's a stupid reason to keep a guy out of the HoF. Ty Cobb is in, isn't he?

bucksfan2
11-30-2010, 02:51 PM
I voted for Larkin, Alomar, Walker, and Morris.

Larkin was the best NL shortstop during his career. And you can make the argument that until Tulo's arrival he was the best NL SS over the course of 20+ years.

Alomar was the best 2b in the game. If you want to hold the spitting over his head you might as well take out quite a few current HOF's.

Walker was the whole package as a LF. Great in all facets of the game.

Morris was a very good pitcher but also a great big game pitcher.

I didn't vote for Blyleven because I wasn't around to see him play and I got tired of hearing him go on a whining tour after he didn't get elected. I wouldn't put Bagwell in right away because of that nasty word, steroids. Im not saying that he did.....just that I can't dismiss it with him.

Red in Chicago
11-30-2010, 02:53 PM
Trammell deserves more love...just sayin'

RichRed
11-30-2010, 03:11 PM
I voted for Larkin, Alomar, Walker, and Morris.

Larkin was the best NL shortstop during his career. And you can make the argument that until Tulo's arrival he was the best NL SS over the course of 20+ years.

Alomar was the best 2b in the game. If you want to hold the spitting over his head you might as well take out quite a few current HOF's.

Walker was the whole package as a LF. Great in all facets of the game.

Morris was a very good pitcher but also a great big game pitcher.

I didn't vote for Blyleven because I wasn't around to see him play and I got tired of hearing him go on a whining tour after he didn't get elected. I wouldn't put Bagwell in right away because of that nasty word, steroids. Im not saying that he did.....just that I can't dismiss it with him.

Spitting's OK but whining isn't?

Morris's career ERA is 3.90 and just barely better than league average during that time. He was a great postseason pitcher in '84 and '91 but lousy in '87 and '92.

Morris getting in before Blyleven would be a travesty, in my opinion.

camisadelgolf
11-30-2010, 03:30 PM
That's a stupid reason to keep a guy out of the HoF. Ty Cobb is in, isn't he?
You're comparing a fringe HoF'er with 63.5 WAR to a legend who has the third-highest total WAR ever. Cobb probably could've murdered his family while in his prime and still have been inducted.

camisadelgolf
11-30-2010, 03:31 PM
Trammell deserves more love...just sayin'
I would put in Lou Whitaker before Alan Trammell, but that ship has sailed. They both deserve to be in the Hall above Alomar if you ask me.

camisadelgolf
11-30-2010, 03:35 PM
hebroncougar vote for Blyleven, Morris, and Smith, but not Larkin. Why not? Too injury prone?

TRF
11-30-2010, 03:47 PM
Dale Murphy gets so little love. 2 time MVP, face of the franchise, never a hint of scandal and he bowed out gracefully, 2 HR's shy of 400. He could have held on to get to 400, but knew his time was done.

Love Raines as a player, but he had the misfortune of having a career while Rickey Henderson was breathing. Henderson... Hall of Fame. Raines? Hall of Stats.

Jpup
11-30-2010, 03:48 PM
Tim Raines is as worthy or more so than anyone on that list. He was a great player.

RedsBaron
11-30-2010, 03:53 PM
Trammell deserves more love...just sayin'

Yep. Among retired shortstops, the line for the HOF starts with Larkin, but Trammell easily is more worthy of the HOF than about half of the guys at that position who have been inducted.
Trammell partisans should be rooting for Larkin to be inducted, because until that happens Barry really blocks the way for Alan as no reasonable person can rank Trammell ahead of Larkin.
On this year's ballot, the two most worthy candidates are Larkin and Alomar. Well, maybe that duo and Raines and Bagwell.

RedsBaron
11-30-2010, 04:01 PM
I would put in Lou Whitaker before Alan Trammell, but that ship has sailed. They both deserve to be in the Hall above Alomar if you ask me.

Whittaker was a fine player but compare him to Alomar:
Whittaker BA .276, Alomar BA .300.
Whittaker SLG .426, Alomar SLG .443.
Whittaker OBP .363, Alomar OBP .371.
Whittaker 2369 hits, Alomar 2724 hits.
Whittaker 1386 runs, Alomar 1508 runs.
Whittaker 244 HRs, Alomar 210 HRs (finally a stat where Whittaker has the edge!).
Whittaker 143 steals, Alomar 474 steals.
Whittaker 1084 RBI, Alomar 1134 RBI.
Whittaker three Gold Gloves, Alomar 10 Gold Gloves.
Whittaker 5 All Star selections, Alomar 12 All Star selections.

The only way you can reasonably argue for Whittaker to be in the HOF while Alomar is not in the HOF is to (1) give a lot of weight to one spitting incident, and (2) to be consistent kick out Ty Cobb, Ted Williams, Babe Ruth and several other players who spit at fans or otherwise behaved at times less than admirably.

westofyou
11-30-2010, 04:04 PM
Spitting's OK but whining isn't?

Morris's career ERA is 3.90 and just barely better than league average during that time. He was a great postseason pitcher in '84 and '91 but lousy in '87 and '92.

Morris getting in before Blyleven would be a travesty, in my opinion.

Yep, there's lots of jerks who I didn't see play, doesn't mean they didn't excel at what they did.

westofyou
11-30-2010, 04:06 PM
Lou Whittaker is to Roberto Alomar what Bob Boone was to Johnny Bench

*BaseClogger*
11-30-2010, 04:19 PM
You're comparing a fringe HoF'er with 63.5 WAR to a legend who has the third-highest total WAR ever. Cobb probably could've murdered his family while in his prime and still have been inducted.

What's fringe about him? He was an excellent defender who had over 2,700 hits and a career .814 OPS at second base...

camisadelgolf
11-30-2010, 04:30 PM
Whittaker was a fine player but compare him to Alomar:
Whittaker BA .276, Alomar BA .300.
Whittaker SLG .426, Alomar SLG .443.
Whittaker OBP .363, Alomar OBP .371.
Whittaker 2369 hits, Alomar 2724 hits.
Whittaker 1386 runs, Alomar 1508 runs.
Whittaker 244 HRs, Alomar 210 HRs (finally a stat where Whittaker has the edge!).
Whittaker 143 steals, Alomar 474 steals.
Whittaker 1084 RBI, Alomar 1134 RBI.
Whittaker three Gold Gloves, Alomar 10 Gold Gloves.
Whittaker 5 All Star selections, Alomar 12 All Star selections.

The only way you can reasonably argue for Whittaker to be in the HOF while Alomar is not in the HOF is to (1) give a lot of weight to one spitting incident, and (2) to be consistent kick out Ty Cobb, Ted Williams, Babe Ruth and several other players who spit at fans or otherwise behaved at times less than admirably.
Without fully researching this, I'll say this much:
Gold Gloves don't hold a lot of weight with me. Palmeiro has a Gold Glove for crying out loud. Defensively, I'll take Whitaker over Alomar any day, and it's not even close.
And All-Star games? That doesn't hold all that much weight with me either. For example, Alfredo Griffin made the All-Star team in 1984.
Whitaker was an above-average hitter in 17 different seasons. Alomar? 13.
Alomar consistently had a better supporting cast, which helped inflate his stats. Whitaker didn't have nearly as much help in that regard.
Whitaker came from more of a pitching-dominant time.
Alomar is known for character issues, which include spitting on an umpire and lying about having AIDs so he could have sex with people, among other accusations.

camisadelgolf
11-30-2010, 04:33 PM
What's fringe about him? He was an excellent defender who had over 2,700 hits and a career .814 OPS at second base...
That in itself doesn't scream 'Hall of Famer' to me. Don't get me wrong--I'd say he's worthy--but he's not a slam-dunk selection for me. And for what it's worth, I've heard him involved with steroids.

camisadelgolf
11-30-2010, 04:34 PM
Lou Whittaker is to Roberto Alomar what Bob Boone was to Johnny Bench
That analogy makes almost no sense.

*BaseClogger*
11-30-2010, 04:35 PM
That in itself doesn't scream 'Hall of Famer' to me. Don't get me wrong--I'd say he's worthy--but he's not a slam-dunk selection for me. And for what it's worth, I've heard him involved with steroids.

2,700 hits from a second basemen who could field doesn't scream HoF?

TRF
11-30-2010, 04:38 PM
Tim Raines is as worthy or more so than anyone on that list. He was a great player.

Raines was a fine player. I'd love a Tim Raines type of player. His numbers warrant inclusion. his fame doesn't. IMO like Murphy, he deserves to be in, but it will take the Veterans Committee to do it.

TRF
11-30-2010, 04:40 PM
Without fully researching this, I'll say this much:
Gold Gloves don't hold a lot of weight with me. Palmeiro has a Gold Glove for crying out loud. Defensively, I'll take Whitaker over Alomar any day, and it's not even close.
And All-Star games? That doesn't hold all that much weight with me either. For example, Alfredo Griffin made the All-Star team in 1984.
Whitaker was an above-average hitter in 17 different seasons. Alomar? 13.
Alomar consistently had a better supporting cast, which helped inflate his stats. Whitaker didn't have nearly as much help in that regard.
Whitaker came from more of a pitching-dominant time.
Alomar is known for character issues, which include spitting on an umpire and lying about having AIDs so he could have sex with people, among other accusations.

And this is where the Fame part comes in. Whitaker never had that "it" factor. Alomar did.

westofyou
11-30-2010, 04:47 PM
Defensively, I'll take Whitaker over Alomar any day, and it's not even close.


"I've seen a lot of second basemen in my time. My father played in the Negro Leagues and the Caribbean Winter League, where I saw Cool Papa Bell play. I played with Julian Javier, Felix Millan, and Cookie Rojas. I played against Bill Mazeroski and Joe Morgan. In All-Star games, I saw Rod Carew. As good as they were, none of them were as good as Roberto Alomar. I've been watching baseball for sixty years, and he's the best I've ever seen."

- Orlando Cepeda

Alomar's career fielding percentage of .984 is the highest of any player at his position in American League history.


"His career numbers look attractive by second-base standards. But it's hard to remember any period when (Lou) Whitaker was looked upon as the greatest second baseman of his era. 'Just' a very good player. There's no shame in that." - ESPN Anaylst Jayson Stark in My Hall of Fame Ballot (11/19/2003)

camisadelgolf
11-30-2010, 04:58 PM
Alomar was all over ESPN's highlight reel, and he was a solid second baseman, but there were a lot of plays he made look difficult that Whitaker could've made look easy. Also, there were a lot of balls he never got to that Whitaker would've. Like TRF, there's an unmeasurable 'it' factor, and unfortunately, Alomar had it while Whitaker didn't, which is why we'll see only one of the two in the Hall of Fame.

westofyou
11-30-2010, 05:02 PM
Alomar was all over ESPN's highlight reel, and he was a solid second baseman, but there were a lot of plays he made look difficult that Whitaker could've made look easy. Also, there were a lot of balls he never got to that Whitaker would've. Like TRF, there's an unmeasurable 'it' factor, and unfortunately, Alomar had it while Whitaker didn't, which is why we'll see only one of the two in the Hall of Fame.

Sorry, I saw both in their prime and Alomar had it way over Lou, he could do it in both leagues, on turf or grass. A better hitter and a better base runner, Lou played in a hitters park with thick grass for his whole career, he's a darn good player but he's Billy Herman to Alomar's Charlie Gehringer.

hebroncougar
11-30-2010, 06:05 PM
hebroncougar vote for Blyleven, Morris, and Smith, but not Larkin. Why not? Too injury prone?

Yep. He didn't have any real large statistical accomplishments. I think he'll eventually get in, and I'm not saying he never deserves to get in, I loved him as a player, but if I vote for the hall, I don't do so with red colored glasses.

RFS62
11-30-2010, 07:59 PM
Sorry, I saw both in their prime and Alomar had it way over Lou, he could do it in both leagues, on turf or grass. A better hitter and a better base runner, Lou played in a hitters park with thick grass for his whole career, he's a darn good player but he's Billy Herman to Alomar's Charlie Gehringer.



I did too. And Alomar was the smoothest I've seen since Mazerowski. A consummate stylist.

Scrap Irony
11-30-2010, 08:13 PM
I voted for nine guys, as I think the 80's era players get continually undervalued by today's experts.

Alan Trammell was one of the two best SS in the AL for a decade. Top five across both leagues. Blyleven and Morris were among the ten best pitchers in the decade. Raines was the second-best leadoff hitter of his era and among the top five ever. All deserve HoF clearance.

Alomar, Larkin, and Bagwell are easy 90's era choices, while Larry Walker and Edgar Martinez get in because they were incredily good over a shorter period of time. (I'd argue that Walker's career 140 OPS+ for 17 seasons makes him a shoo-in anyway.)

GADawg
11-30-2010, 08:18 PM
Raines was a fine player. I'd love a Tim Raines type of player. His numbers warrant inclusion. his fame doesn't. IMO like Murphy, he deserves to be in, but it will take the Veterans Committee to do it.

i voted for both Raines and Murphy but realistically i think you're correct here and even then i'm not sure the veterans committee will ever vote 'em in either

mth123
11-30-2010, 09:48 PM
Why is the ballot incomplete? Palmeiro would get my vote.

George Anderson
11-30-2010, 09:57 PM
Blyleven
Larkin
Alomar
Raines
Smith
Franco

GADawg
11-30-2010, 09:58 PM
Why is the ballot incomplete? Palmeiro would get my vote.

did you vote for McGwire? just curious. I know Palmeiro played alot of 1st base but I couldn't bring myself to vote for Edgar Martinez or Harold Baines....great hitters but I still think real ballplayers own gloves. Interested to know how the rest of the forum feels

camisadelgolf
11-30-2010, 10:09 PM
Why is the ballot incomplete? Palmeiro would get my vote.
I believe Palmeiro is the only one with a reasonable chance that I forgot. I doubt many people would vote for him, though.

mth123
11-30-2010, 10:30 PM
did you vote for McGwire? just curious. I know Palmeiro played alot of 1st base but I couldn't bring myself to vote for Edgar Martinez or Harold Baines....great hitters but I still think real ballplayers own gloves. Interested to know how the rest of the forum feels

Palmeiro played 2139 games at 1B and 212 in the OF and (if my math is correct) 438 at DH. If Molitor and Jackson are in, not sure why Palmeiro wouldn't be. Palmeiro had 3020 hits and 569 HR.

Yes, I voted for McGwire. Both are as worthy (or more) than anyone on this list.

GADawg
11-30-2010, 10:32 PM
Palmeiro played 2139 games at 1B and 212 in the OF and (if my math is correct) 438 at DH. If Molitor and Jackson are in, not sure why Palmeiro wouldn't be. Palmeiro had 3020 hits and 569 HR.

Yes, I voted for McGwire. Both are as worthy (or more) than anyone on this list.

what are your feelings on Baines and Edgar?

mth123
11-30-2010, 10:44 PM
what are your feelings are Baines and Edgar?

Both are borderline IMO and being a DH might be the tiebreaker to vote no. If the case was clear cut, I'd vote for them. I might vote for Martinez anyway.

The Operator
11-30-2010, 10:46 PM
Wow, I think I forgot to vote for Larkin on that poll. Stupid, stupid Operator.

marcshoe
12-01-2010, 12:15 AM
I voted for Trammell because of all the comparisons with Larkin, but honestly, I'm not sure he rises to that level. I think Larkin's his clearcut superior. Maybe I should have gone for Edgar or Baines. I admit to thinking highly of Edgar M in spite of his being the ideal DH.

WebScorpion
12-01-2010, 04:14 AM
I didn't vote for Bagwell, Alomar, or Walker because I didn't think they deserve 'first ballot' induction. I'd probably vote for them if it were their second year.

Ron Madden
12-01-2010, 05:07 AM
Whittaker was a fine player but compare him to Alomar:
Whittaker BA .276, Alomar BA .300.
Whittaker SLG .426, Alomar SLG .443.
Whittaker OBP .363, Alomar OBP .371.
Whittaker 2369 hits, Alomar 2724 hits.
Whittaker 1386 runs, Alomar 1508 runs.
Whittaker 244 HRs, Alomar 210 HRs (finally a stat where Whittaker has the edge!).
Whittaker 143 steals, Alomar 474 steals.
Whittaker 1084 RBI, Alomar 1134 RBI.
Whittaker three Gold Gloves, Alomar 10 Gold Gloves.
Whittaker 5 All Star selections, Alomar 12 All Star selections.

The only way you can reasonably argue for Whittaker to be in the HOF while Alomar is not in the HOF is to (1) give a lot of weight to one spitting incident, and (2) to be consistent kick out Ty Cobb, Ted Williams, Babe Ruth and several other players who spit at fans or otherwise behaved at times less than admirably.

Enough said. :beerme:

Ron Madden
12-01-2010, 05:13 AM
I thought I voted for Dave Parker before I hit submit. I screwed up.

Ron Madden
12-01-2010, 06:15 AM
Thought I would share this in this thread.

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20101129/SPT04/311290094/1062/SPT/Larkin-back-on-Hall-of-Fame-ballot

.

redsfandan
12-01-2010, 06:39 AM
I believe Palmeiro is the only one with a reasonable chance that I forgot. I doubt many people would vote for him, though.
Besides Palmeiro, Juan Gonzalez is also missing and, while he may not get in, he's got a shot. But, you did include McGwire, despite that huge black cloud hanging over his head, and Baines and Olerud, despite inferior stats. Woops.

Here's the rest of the players that are on the ballot for the 1st time:

Benito Santiago
Bret Boone
Marquis Grissom
Carlos Baerga
Tino Martinez
B.J. Surhoff
Charles Johnson
Bobby Higginson
Raul Mondesi
Kirk Rueter
Lenny Harris

Anyone want to take a guess which players out of that bunch will get the 5% necessary to avoid being kicked off the ballot?

redsfandan
12-01-2010, 06:41 AM
I didn't vote for Bagwell, Alomar, or Walker because I didn't think they deserve 'first ballot' induction. I'd probably vote for them if it were their second year.So, does Alomar get your vote then since this is actually his 2nd year on the ballot? ;)

mth123
12-01-2010, 06:52 AM
Besides Palmeiro, Juan Gonzalez is also missing and, while he may not get in, he's got a shot. But, you did include McGwire, despite that huge black cloud hanging over his head, and Baines and Olerud, despite inferior stats. Woops.

Here's the rest of the players that are on the ballot for the 1st time:

Benito Santiago
Bret Boone
Marquis Grissom
Carlos Baerga
Tino Martinez
B.J. Surhoff
Charles Johnson
Bobby Higginson
Raul Mondesi
Kirk Rueter
Lenny Harris

Anyone want to take a guess which players out of that bunch will get the 5% necessary to avoid being kicked off the ballot?

None of these guys should get votes IMO.

redsfandan
12-01-2010, 07:39 AM
Dale Murphy gets so little love. 2 time MVP, face of the franchise, never a hint of scandal and he bowed out gracefully, 2 HR's shy of 400. He could have held on to get to 400, but knew his time was done.

Love Raines as a player, but he had the misfortune of having a career while Rickey Henderson was breathing. Henderson... Hall of Fame. Raines? Hall of Stats.
Murphy was great in his prime. Unfortunately there weren't enough really good years and there were too many years where he was just ok.

Raines also had the misfortune of playing so much of his career as an Expo.

None of these guys should get votes IMO.

Just like Eric Karros, Pat Hentgen, Kevin Appier, and David Segui shouldn't have received any votes last year. But they did.

bucksfan2
12-01-2010, 09:49 AM
Just like Eric Karros, Pat Hentgen, Kevin Appier, and David Segui shouldn't have received any votes last year. But they did.

If a BWA writer covered a guy and really had a great appreciation for him as a player as well as a person I don't have any problem him throwing the player a bone and giving him a vote. Its is obvious that none of these players are going to make the HOF but as a gesture I don't mind it.

RedsBaron
12-01-2010, 09:54 AM
Murphy was great in his prime. Unfortunately there weren't enough really good years and there were too many years where he was just ok.


The best argument in favor of inducting Murphy into the HOF may be summed up in two words: Jim Rice. As I mentioned earlier in this thread, I have never been able to separate the HOF qualifications of those two.
Rice leads on the Hall of Fame Monitor scale by 144 to 116, but both are above the 100 score of the "average" Hall of Famer, and part of Rice's edge comes from his playing on better teams for most of his career. I don't know that he deserves extra credit because he had Yaz, Tiant, Fisk, Lynn, Evans, Boggs and Clemens as his teammates.
Their numbers are close in most categories, usually with a slight edge to Rice (his numbers are listed first): BA-.298 to .265, OBP-.352 to .346, SLG-.502 to .469, runs-1249 to 1197, hits 2452 to 2111, HRs-382 to 398, RBI 1451 to 1266, OPS+ 128 to 121. However, when their stats are neutralized for park effects the percentages narrow, with BA being .290 to .265, OBP .344 to .346 and SLG .488 to .467.
Murphy was by far the better base runner, with a 30-30 season and a career edge in steals, 161 to 58.
Murphy was also easily the better in the field, winning 5 Gold Gloves as a centerfielder whereas Rice won zero Gold Gloves as a leftfielder (and DH).
Rice was an eight time All Star, Murphy was a seven time All Star.
Rice won one MVP award while Murphy won two MVP awards.
Rice lead in slugging twice. Murphy lead in slugging twice.
Rice lead in OPS once. Murphy lead in OPS once.
Rice lead in RBI twice. Murphy lead in RBI twice.
Rice lead in HRs three times while Murphy lead in HRs twice.
Rice lead in total bases four times to Murphy's once.
Rice lead in hits once while Murphy lead in runs once.
Rice's career batting WAR is 41.5 while Murphy's is 44.2
There are guys in the HOF who are not as good as either Rice or Murphy, and neither Rice nor Murphy is overwhelmingly qualified for the HOF. To me, if one deserves to be there, the other does, and if one doesn't deserve to be there the other one should not be there either.

redsfandan
12-01-2010, 11:00 AM
The best argument in favor of inducting Murphy into the HOF may be summed up in two words: Jim Rice. As I mentioned earlier in this thread, I have never been able to separate the HOF qualifications of those two.
Rice leads on the Hall of Fame Monitor scale by 144 to 116, but both are above the 100 score of the "average" Hall of Famer, and part of Rice's edge comes from his playing on better teams for most of his career. I don't know that he deserves extra credit because he had Yaz, Tiant, Fisk, Lynn, Evans, Boggs and Clemens as his teammates.
Their numbers are close in most categories, usually with a slight edge to Rice (his numbers are listed first): BA-.298 to .265, OBP-.352 to .346, SLG-.502 to .469, runs-1249 to 1197, hits 2452 to 2111, HRs-382 to 398, RBI 1451 to 1266, OPS+ 128 to 121. However, when their stats are neutralized for park effects the percentages narrow, with BA being .290 to .265, OBP .344 to .346 and SLG .488 to .467.
Murphy was by far the better base runner, with a 30-30 season and a career edge in steals, 161 to 58.
Murphy was also easily the better in the field, winning 5 Gold Gloves as a centerfielder whereas Rice won zero Gold Gloves as a leftfielder (and DH).
Rice was an eight time All Star, Murphy was a seven time All Star.
Rice won one MVP award while Murphy won two MVP awards.
Rice lead in slugging twice. Murphy lead in slugging twice.
Rice lead in OPS once. Murphy lead in OPS once.
Rice lead in RBI twice. Murphy lead in RBI twice.
Rice lead in HRs three times while Murphy lead in HRs twice.
Rice lead in total bases four times to Murphy's once.
Rice lead in hits once while Murphy lead in runs once.
Rice's career batting WAR is 41.5 while Murphy's is 44.2
There are guys in the HOF who are not as good as either Rice or Murphy, and neither Rice nor Murphy is overwhelmingly qualified for the HOF. To me, if one deserves to be there, the other does, and if one doesn't deserve to be there the other one should not be there either.

If I could have one on my team it would be Murphy easily. He was the better all-around complete player. But, unfortunately, Rice just had more good offensive seasons.

dabvu2498
12-01-2010, 11:36 AM
Whittaker was a fine player but compare him to Alomar:
Whittaker BA .276, Alomar BA .300.
Whittaker SLG .426, Alomar SLG .443.
Whittaker OBP .363, Alomar OBP .371.


Comparing them in context, however (OPS+), both come in at 116.

camisadelgolf
12-01-2010, 11:54 AM
I'm really surprised that if the polling were to end today, Larkin would be our only inductee.

Razor Shines
12-01-2010, 04:37 PM
I'd have voted for Palmeiro if he were on it. I voted for Mcgwire and I'd vote for Sosa (even though I hate him) and AROD when they come up.

camisadelgolf
12-01-2010, 04:51 PM
I didn't vote for McGwire, but it wasn't because of his use of steroids. He missed a lot of playing time and essentially played only 12 seasons. That in itself shouldn't necessarily cost him a vote because when he did play, he produced amazing stats. However, I typically look for a more complete player when it comes to the Hall of Fame, and due to injuries or whatever the reason, he didn't run the bases very well and played less than impressive defense. This was also during an era when even Brady Anderson could hit 50 homeruns. In other words, he could take a walk and hit a homerun, but he couldnt' do much else. Steroids or not, I feel like there are plenty of more-deserving candidates.

crazybob60
12-01-2010, 05:43 PM
I am really surprised that Alomar is getting as much consideration after he spit in the umpire's face like he did, but again, I guess he is forgiven for that.

I am also surprised Fred McGriff doesn't get more consideration, and I wonder if he would have reached 500 homeruns if he would get in easier...

westofyou
12-01-2010, 05:53 PM
I am really surprised that Alomar is getting as much consideration after he spit in the umpire's face like he did, but again, I guess he is forgiven for that.

I am also surprised Fred McGriff doesn't get more consideration, and I wonder if he would have reached 500 homeruns if he would get in easier...

Babe Ruth spit in an umpires face, he also punched one out.

George Anderson
12-01-2010, 06:20 PM
I am really surprised that Alomar is getting as much consideration after he spit in the umpire's face like he did, but again, I guess he is forgiven for that.

I am also surprised Fred McGriff doesn't get more consideration, and I wonder if he would have reached 500 homeruns if he would get in easier...

I would be suprised if any writers or umpires thought the spitting incident should cost Alomar votes. A brief lapse in judgement shouldn't give him the death sentence for the HOF.

I agree on McGriff. I don't think he is worthy of the HOF but his vote total is paltry.