PDA

View Full Version : Dave Parker deserves spot in HOF



Ron Madden
12-26-2010, 10:42 AM
Here's an interesting article by John Erardi.

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20101225/COL19/12260348

.

PuffyPig
12-26-2010, 11:09 AM
He's like Tony Perez, a marginal candidate.

Perex got in barely due to his character and Big Red Machine exposure and reputation as a clutch hitter.

Parker's reputation away from the game will likely tip the scales in non-admission, like it or not.

redsmetz
12-26-2010, 12:07 PM
I actually thought about posting this but taking the angle Erardi does with sabermetrics. Erardi has done a world of good for me, somewhat of a sabermetric resister, if you will, to get me to better understand what it's all about. But in this article he comes with a balance to it as well, which is why I find his approach so refreshing and valuable.

In this portion, he writes:

My sabermetric friends tell me Parker is essentially Albert Belle minus the surly personality, and that they would vote for Dale Murphy, Mark McGwire, Rafael Palmeiro, Tim Raines, Don Mattingly and Larry Walker (this is his first year on the ballot), before they would vote for Parker.

But I look at it this way:

Besides giving points to players who post their best years in their championship seasons, I also give points to players who resurrect their careers from the ash heap - as Parker did in the second half of the 1980s - even when that demise is self-inflicted.

I applaud sabermetricians for trying to remove all forms of subjectivity, but I'm not going to give zero weight to guys who play for World Series' teams and bounce back from demises.

I just can't go "pure math" on these guys.

Highlighting this is not a knock on sabermetrics. I believe that Erardi makes sabermetrics understandable to folks like me. But I think he makes a strong point that it can't tell the whole story in some cases.

I share his belief that should be in, warts and all.

George Anderson
12-26-2010, 12:37 PM
What is sad like Erardi pointed out about Parker is he lost 4 prime years of his career during ages 29-33 due to his cocaine involvement. During that 4 year span he averaged 10 HR's and around 60 RBI's. It goes without saying had he been clean he would have put up his regular monster numbers of say 30-40 HR's with 90-100 RBI's and he likely would have been enshrined already.

Parker was the first big name free agent the Reds ever signed and I was a pretty big fan of his. His presence and attitude seemed to change the attitude the early 80's teams had of losing. He also played a big part in helping a young Eric Davis become the player he was. However like his manager Mr. Rose, he did something very dumb during his career and is now paying the consequences for it.

Big Klu
12-26-2010, 01:24 PM
I actually thought about posting this but taking the angle Erardi does with sabermetrics. Erardi has done a world of good for me, somewhat of a sabermetric resister, if you will, to get me to better understand what it's all about. But in this article he comes with a balance to it as well, which is why I find his approach so refreshing and valuable.

In this portion, he writes:

My sabermetric friends tell me Parker is essentially Albert Belle minus the surly personality, and that they would vote for Dale Murphy, Mark McGwire, Rafael Palmeiro, Tim Raines, Don Mattingly and Larry Walker (this is his first year on the ballot), before they would vote for Parker.

But I look at it this way:

Besides giving points to players who post their best years in their championship seasons, I also give points to players who resurrect their careers from the ash heap - as Parker did in the second half of the 1980s - even when that demise is self-inflicted.

I applaud sabermetricians for trying to remove all forms of subjectivity, but I'm not going to give zero weight to guys who play for World Series' teams and bounce back from demises.

I just can't go "pure math" on these guys.

Highlighting this is not a knock on sabermetrics. I believe that Erardi makes sabermetrics understandable to folks like me. But I think he makes a strong point that it can't tell the whole story in some cases.

I share his belief that should be in, warts and all.

Wasn't Tim Raines implicated in the Pittsburgh drug trials, too?

George Anderson
12-26-2010, 01:45 PM
Wasn't Tim Raines implicated in the Pittsburgh drug trials, too?



Tim Raines of the Montreal Expos testified that he stashed a gram of cocaine in the back pocket of his uniform pants during games. The speedster, who at the time of the hearing was the four time defending National League stolen base champion, testified that he always slid into bases headfirst to ensure that the glass vial wouldn't break
\


http://www.suite101.com/content/the-pittsburgh-baseball-drug-trials-a59057

Chip R
12-26-2010, 09:22 PM
What is sad like Erardi pointed out about Parker is he lost 4 prime years of his career during ages 29-33 due to his cocaine involvement. During that 4 year span he averaged 10 HR's and around 60 RBI's. It goes without saying had he been clean he would have put up his regular monster numbers of say 30-40 HR's with 90-100 RBI's and he likely would have been enshrined already.

Parker was the first big name free agent the Reds ever signed and I was a pretty big fan of his. His presence and attitude seemed to change the attitude the early 80's teams had of losing. He also played a big part in helping a young Eric Davis become the player he was. However like his manager Mr. Rose, he did something very dumb during his career and is now paying the consequences for it.

I agree, George. Of course abusing cocaine does not necessarily mean exclusion from the HOF. Paul Molitor is in.

George Anderson
12-26-2010, 10:59 PM
I agree, George. Of course abusing cocaine does not necessarily mean exclusion from the HOF. Paul Molitor is in.

Fergie Jenkins to.

Johnny Footstool
12-27-2010, 12:05 AM
You evaluate the player based on the career he had, not the career he might have had.

camisadelgolf
12-27-2010, 12:16 AM
You evaluate the player based on the career he had, not the career he might have had.
History shows that that hasn't always been the case. Roy Campanella comes to mind.

George Anderson
12-27-2010, 12:55 AM
History shows that that hasn't always been the case. Roy Campanella comes to mind.

Campy won 3 MVP's. He was getting in regardless if the accident happened or not.

Ron Madden
12-27-2010, 02:18 AM
Not that I agree or disagree with him but It seems to me that John Erardi puts a bit more thought into his HOF ballot than either Paul Daugherty or Hal McCoy put into theirs. (JMHO)

camisadelgolf
12-27-2010, 06:53 AM
Campy won 3 MVP's. He was getting in regardless if the accident happened or not.
He had less than 10 years as a Major Leaguer, and three of his last four years were 'down' years that signified the beginning of the end. I don't think anyone should get voted into the Hall based on only six successful years.

edabbs44
12-27-2010, 07:02 AM
He had less than 10 years as a Major Leaguer, and three of his last four years were 'down' years that signified the beginning of the end. I don't think anyone should get voted into the Hall based on only six successful years.

He also wasn't allowed to play in the majors until he was 26.

camisadelgolf
12-27-2010, 07:09 AM
He also wasn't allowed to play in the majors until he was 26.
To be technical, Jackie Robinson joined the Dodgers in 1947. Campanella was in the minors at the time and didn't join until the middle of 1948. Anyway, it just further proves my point.

You evaluate the player based on the career he had, not the career he might have had.
Right or wrong, players are sometimes voted into the Hall based on the careers they might have had.

Roy Tucker
12-27-2010, 08:31 AM
What is sad like Erardi pointed out about Parker is he lost 4 prime years of his career during ages 29-33 due to his cocaine involvement. During that 4 year span he averaged 10 HR's and around 60 RBI's. It goes without saying had he been clean he would have put up his regular monster numbers of say 30-40 HR's with 90-100 RBI's and he likely would have been enshrined already.

Parker was the first big name free agent the Reds ever signed and I was a pretty big fan of his. His presence and attitude seemed to change the attitude the early 80's teams had of losing. He also played a big part in helping a young Eric Davis become the player he was. However like his manager Mr. Rose, he did something very dumb during his career and is now paying the consequences for it.

Pretty good take on Parker's career.

The thing is about Parker, there were about 3-4 years where he was one of those absolutely feared players where he just *killed* the Reds. He'd come up to bat at some critical time and my first thought would be "oh crap".

Some guys like Pujols, Bagwell, Bonds, McCovey, Schmidt, Chipper Jones, Stargell, or Parker were the guys where you'd just wince and cover one eye when they were up to bat and think "please, just don't hurt us too badly here". The Jaws theme ought to play on the PA.

But invariably, they would. Some bolt would come off their bat and it was at the worst of times and guys are flying around the bases and then the dust clears and a crooked number goes up on the board. And they would be perched on 2nd or 3rd with this arrogant look like "I *own* you guys". And the problem was, he did.

Parker was one of those guys for a while with the Pirates. But I don't think he ever regained that feared status again. Even with the Reds, he was a good player, but not one of those killer guys.

Danny Serafini
12-27-2010, 09:35 AM
I don't think anyone should get voted into the Hall based on only six successful years.

I'm curious, do you feel Sandy Koufax should be in the HOF?

camisadelgolf
12-27-2010, 09:41 AM
I'm curious, do you feel Sandy Koufax should be in the HOF?
Yes, because his era of dominance was more dominant than Campanella's. But don't get me wrong--I'm not saying Campanella doesn't belong. I haven't made my mind up on him yet.

westofyou
12-27-2010, 09:42 AM
I'm curious, do you feel Sandy Koufax should be in the HOF?

In

Campy - In

Ross Youngs - out

Parker - out.

Not a strong enough career on the middle much alone the back end. BA driven when his skills were at peak, his slugging percentage was the only real superior skill he had as he aged.

Vs the league



DAVE PARKER

YEAR TEAM AGE G AB R H 2B 3B HR HR% RBI BB SO SB CS AVG SLG OBA OPS
1973 Pirates 22 8 0 6 4 0 1 0.39 -1 -11 8 -1 0 .025 .063 -.024 .039
1974 Pirates 23 12 1 7 1 2 0 -0.23 5 -12 25 -1 -1 .020 .030 -.012 .017
1975 Pirates 24 35 9 33 12 6 15 2.49 40 -17 19 -2 -1 .043 .158 .021 .179
1976 Pirates 25 34 21 36 7 6 4 0.63 33 -20 13 8 -1 .050 .101 .020 .120
1977 Pirates 26 58 30 59 17 3 6 0.72 16 -1 23 3 -11 .068 .120 .060 .180
1978 Pirates 27 69 39 60 9 8 19 3.08 58 6 21 7 -1 .072 .200 .064 .264
1979 Pirates 28 48 35 39 19 2 12 1.73 25 11 22 6 3 .041 .127 .046 .173
1980 Pirates 29 28 11 22 9 -3 7 1.30 23 -21 3 -5 0 .029 .070 -.002 .068
1981 Pirates 30 3 1 0 3 1 5 2.01 22 -14 -6 0 1 -.004 .078 -.040 .038
1982 Pirates 31 -2 10 1 8 1 1 0.39 0 -1 10 0 -2 .005 .061 .001 .062
1983 Pirates 32 15 0 12 6 0 0 -0.08 6 -27 8 -4 -1 .016 .021 -.021 .000
1984 Reds 33 25 1 20 3 -4 4 0.58 27 -16 0 -5 -3 .022 .027 .000 .027
1985 Reds 34 27 12 40 14 0 20 3.07 54 -9 -11 -11 -6 .052 .164 .037 .200
1986 Reds 35 12 9 11 2 -1 16 2.42 42 -9 24 -18 3 .012 .083 -.002 .082
1987 Reds 36 -6 -5 -11 -1 -4 9 1.50 20 -18 7 -11 4 -.016 .014 -.028 -.014
1988 A's 37 15 -3 3 1 -1 3 0.71 12 -2 12 -7 2 -.002 .015 -.011 .005
1989 A's 38 2 -14 2 3 -3 10 1.75 32 -14 3 -11 5 .003 .048 -.017 .031
1990 Brewers 39 14 -5 21 2 -1 7 1.10 21 -18 3 -8 -1 .029 .063 .003 .066
1991 Angels 40 -4 -17 -14 0 -1 -1 -0.16 -2 -18 13 -6 3 -.028 -.036 -.049 -.086
Blue Jays 40 4 -2 4 3 0 -1 -2.52 -1 1 2 -1 -1 .073 .050 .071 .121
TOTALS 0 -19 -11 2 -1 -2 -0.33 -3 -17 14 -6 2 -.021 -.030 -.040 -.071
TOTALS 397 134 351 121 11 136 1.36 433 -209 200 -66 -9 .026 .080 .008 .088


YEAR TEAM RC RCAA RCAP OWP RC/G TB EBH ISO SEC BPA IBB HBP SAC SF GIDP OUTS PA POS
TOTALS -15 -1.01 -15 0 -.009 -.056 -.048 -1 0 -5 -1 3 0 -23
1973 Pirates 1 0.23 12 5 .038 -.058 .023 -1 1 0 -1 1 0 -3 RF
1974 Pirates 1 0.18 11 3 .010 -.058 .002 -2 2 -2 -2 2 0 -2 RF
1975 Pirates 31 2.04 101 33 .115 .073 .117 -3 2 -5 -3 -6 0 11 RF
1976 Pirates 21 1.45 67 17 .050 .021 .075 0 0 -4 0 -5 0 10 RF
1977 Pirates 48 2.87 100 26 .052 .044 .103 6 4 -4 -1 5 0 57 RF
1978 Pirates 67 4.46 143 36 .128 .135 .196 16 -1 -4 -3 3 0 67 RF
1979 Pirates 53 3.17 98 33 .085 .103 .140 6 6 -5 4 6 0 64 RF
1980 Pirates 12 0.82 47 13 .042 -.014 .038 -1 0 -4 1 3 0 4 RF
1981 Pirates 0 0.03 20 9 .082 .020 .046 0 1 -2 1 0 0 -12 RF
1982 Pirates 2 0.34 14 10 .056 .052 .038 -1 0 -2 1 -2 0 -4 RF
1983 Pirates -4 -0.27 17 5 .006 -.053 -.017 -1 -2 -4 1 1 0 -17 RF
1984 Reds 5 0.27 26 2 .006 -.034 .003 3 -1 -4 1 5 0 5 RF
1985 Reds 33 1.85 114 34 .112 .075 .099 16 0 -4 -1 -12 0 13 RF
1986 Reds 10 0.57 58 16 .071 .027 .037 8 -2 -4 1 -5 0 -3 RF
1987 Reds -10 -0.58 6 3 .030 -.017 -.010 5 5 -4 1 -1 0 -21 RF
1988 A's 2 0.15 12 3 .017 -.011 .009 -1 -3 -3 -1 5 0 6 DH
1989 A's -2 -0.15 28 9 .045 -.001 .003 9 -2 -5 3 -8 0 -17 DH
1990 Brewers 9 0.51 44 9 .034 -.011 .017 6 0 -5 9 -4 0 -1 DH
1991 Angels -17 -1.21 -19 -2 -.008 -.058 -.055 -1 0 -4 -1 2 0 -28 DH
Blue Jays 2 2.00 4 2 -.023 -.031 .038 0 0 0 0 1 0 4 DH
TOTALS -15 -1.01 -15 0 -.009 -.056 -.048 -1 0 -5 -1 3 0 -23
TOTALS 263 1.02 902 268 .054 .019 .052 66 9 -71 9 -8 0 134

wolfboy
12-27-2010, 10:30 AM
This article is from early this year, but it seems appropriate given the discussion. I apologize if it's already been posted:


Like the rest of you, I have been told that Cooperstown does not house the Hall of Numbers or Hall of Very Good; it is the Hall of Fame. That, like so much about the process, sounds definitive but really isn't.

Is it for players who had fame, or players who should have had fame? I have no idea. I don't think it is possible to quantify the word fame. But every year, I watch people try.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/michael_rosenberg/01/06/rosenberg.hall.of.fame/index.html

George Anderson
12-27-2010, 02:09 PM
He had less than 10 years as a Major Leaguer, and three of his last four years were 'down' years that signified the beginning of the end. I don't think anyone should get voted into the Hall based on only six successful years.

Campy was forced to play in the Negro Leagues. Do his years in the Negro Leagues not count?

Campanella is generally regarded by baseball historians to be one of the top 5 catchers of all time. I can't ever recall seeing a select list of all time great catchers where he wasn't mentioned at the very least in the top 5.

westofyou
12-27-2010, 02:17 PM
Campy was forced to play in the Negro Leagues. Do his years in the Negro Leagues not count?

Campanella is generally regarded by baseball historians to be one of the top 5 catchers of all time. I can't ever recall seeing a select list of all time great catchers where he wasn't mentioned at the very least in the top 5.

Joined the Baltimore Elite Giants at the age of 16, played ten years of NL ball, anyone who wants to punish a man for not being a long term player can't overlook the fact that he wasn't limited by his skill set, but by his color.

Shoot, Campy played MLB later than Bench did.

camisadelgolf
12-27-2010, 02:40 PM
Campy was forced to play in the Negro Leagues. Do his years in the Negro Leagues not count?

Campanella is generally regarded by baseball historians to be one of the top 5 catchers of all time. I can't ever recall seeing a select list of all time great catchers where he wasn't mentioned at the very least in the top 5.
Of course Campanella needs to be mentioned in every top-catchers list. In his prime, he was one of the best catchers ever. Do his years in the Negro Leagues count? Of course they should count for something. Any way you cut it, he was an amazing player. I'm not disputing that claim at all.

But you want to know someone else who was amazing in a different league and then immediately succeeded when he joined Major League Baseball? Ichiro Suzuki. What if he decided to return to Japan after 2006? You could easily argue that in the first six years of his career, Suzuki accomplished more than Campanella did throughout his entire career.

And of course Suzuki leaving would bring the question, "What if Suzuki never returned to Japan?" Would he be considered for the Hall of Fame based on six amazing years in MLB plus a phenomenal Japanese career? I really doubt it to be honest with you.

All I'm trying to say is that 'what if' was taken into consideration when Campanella was elected into the Hall, and it probably won't be the last time that it happens.

George Anderson
12-27-2010, 02:54 PM
.

You could easily argue that in the first six years of his career, Suzuki accomplished more than Campanella did throughout his entire career.


.

Campanella won 3 MVP's to Suzuki's 1.

Discounting the fact Campy was barred from MLB due to his skin color while Suzuki never was, Suzuki's MLB career pales in comparison to Campy's.

TheNext44
12-27-2010, 03:00 PM
Of course Campanella needs to be mentioned in every top-catchers list. In his prime, he was one of the best catchers ever. Do his years in the Negro Leagues count? Of course they should count for something. Any way you cut it, he was an amazing player. I'm not disputing that claim at all.
But you want to know someone else who was amazing in a different league and then immediately succeeded when he joined Major League Baseball? Ichiro Suzuki. What if he decided to return to Japan after 2006? You could easily argue that in the first six years of his career, Suzuki accomplished more than Campanella did throughout his entire career.
And of course Suzuki leaving would bring the question, "What if Suzuki never returned to Japan?" Would he be considered for the Hall of Fame based on six amazing years in MLB plus a phenomenal Japanese career? I really doubt it to be honest with you.
All I'm trying to say is that 'what if' was taken into consideration when Campanella was elected into the Hall, and it probably won't be the last time that it happens.

Big difference between the two. Suzuki could have played in the United States MLB anytime he wanted to.

The reason why Negro League stats need to be included in discussing any player who played in it, is that those players likely would have played in the majors, if allowed.

camisadelgolf
12-27-2010, 03:26 PM
Big difference between the two. Suzuki could have played in the United States MLB anytime he wanted to.

The reason why Negro League stats need to be included in discussing any player who played in it, is that those players likely would have played in the majors, if allowed.
Because of how things work over there, playing in America wasn't much of an option for Suzuki.

camisadelgolf
12-27-2010, 03:28 PM
Big difference between the two. Suzuki could have played in the United States MLB anytime he wanted to.

The reason why Negro League stats need to be included in discussing any player who played in it, is that those players likely would have played in the majors, if allowed.
And what were Campanella's stats? It's also worth noting that the competition was much, much weaker.

camisadelgolf
12-27-2010, 03:32 PM
Campanella won 3 MVP's to Suzuki's 1.

Discounting the fact Campy was barred from MLB due to his skin color while Suzuki never was, Suzuki's MLB career pales in comparison to Campy's.
Even Jim Konstanty had an MVP award during that time period. You're probably aware of the joke that is the Gold Glove awards. Edinson Volquez got votes for Rookie of the Year even when he wasn't a rookie. Those awards don't mean too much to me.

westofyou
12-27-2010, 03:42 PM
Even Jim Konstanty had an MVP award during that time period. You're probably aware of the joke that is the Gold Glove awards. Edinson Volquez got votes for Rookie of the Year even when he wasn't a rookie. Those awards don't mean too much to me.

MVP can be a joke, but winning it 3 times kinda makes it a given that the guy has it.

Keep fighting those windmills.

camisadelgolf
12-27-2010, 04:04 PM
MVP can be a joke, but winning it 3 times kinda makes it a given that the guy has it.

Keep fighting those windmills.
Ugh. :bang:

I've made it pretty clear that I think Roy Campanella was an amazing baseball player. I can begin to start repeating myself over and over again in addition to what I have said and stated in the past during this thread to a point of redundancy if that helps. I'm not arguing that Campanella was bad nor am I saying he doesn't belong in the Hall.

What I am saying is that part of the reason Campanella was voted into the Hall is based on 'what if'. What if he wasn't forced to play in the Negro Leagues? What if his career hadn't ended so abruptly?

Aside from points people are claiming I'm trying to make, this is the only thing I am contesting in this thread:

You evaluate the player based on the career he had, not the career he might have had.

camisadelgolf
12-27-2010, 04:08 PM
MVP can be a joke, but winning it 3 times kinda makes it a given that the guy has it.
Should Roger Maris be in the Hall? He also has multiple MVP awards (in addition to a Gold Glove award, All-Star appearances, World Series rings, etc.).

westofyou
12-27-2010, 04:11 PM
Ugh. :bang:

I've made it pretty clear that I think Roy Campanella was an amazing baseball player. I can begin to start repeating myself over and over again in addition to what I have said and stated in the past during this thread to a point of redundancy if that helps. I'm not arguing that Campanella was bad nor am I saying he doesn't belong in the Hall.

What I am saying is that part of the reason Campanella was voted into the Hall is based on 'what if'. What if he wasn't forced to play in the Negro Leagues? What if his career hadn't ended so abruptly?

Aside from points people are claiming I'm trying to make, this is the only thing I am contesting in this thread:

Mickey Cochrane, Buck Ewing, Roger Bresnahan all had careers similar in length to Campy.

He's measured against receivers and when he was elected, there were not many in there.

westofyou
12-27-2010, 04:12 PM
Should Roger Maris be in the Hall? He also has multiple MVP awards (in addition to a Gold Glove award, All-Star appearances, World Series rings, etc.).

No, because his career arc was much smaller than Campanella's

More windmill please

George Anderson
12-27-2010, 04:18 PM
Since we are on the subject of Campy.

I didn't realize he threw out 57% of the base runners who tried to steal a base on him, the highest by any catcher in major league history.

camisadelgolf
12-27-2010, 04:49 PM
No, because his career arc was much smaller than Campanella's

More windmill please
Unless you're claiming that Campanella went to the Hall based on his MLB performance and nothing else, there's no windmill here.

TheNext44
12-27-2010, 06:19 PM
Unless you're claiming that Campanella went to the Hall based on his MLB performance and nothing else, there's no windmill here.

The criteria I use to determine if a player is a HOF'er is if he was one of the best at his position for at least a decade. Before the accident, Campanella was easily the best catcher of his day for at least a decade. The only catch is that he spent part of that time in the Negro leagues. Really hard to hold that against him espeially when some of his prime years were spent playing there.