Turn Off Ads?
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 35

Thread: Hall of Fame Thoughts by Chris Welsh

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Cincinnati, Oh
    Posts
    73

    Hall of Fame Thoughts by Chris Welsh

    " If you have to check the numbers [to determine yes or no for the Hall of Fame] then maybe you shouldn't be voting. Maybe you should know the game better."

    Truer words have never been spoken. A truly knowledgable baseball fan can determine greatness by watching the player, and knowing or understanding their greatness, without the minutiae or drivel of a bunch of numbers. If a player is great you know it.

    Don Cameron
    A lover of the game

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #2
    Member gfas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    43

    Re: Hall of Fame Thoughts by Chris Welsh

    was that whole thing sarcasm??

  4. #3
    Moderator RedlegJake's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    North Kansas City, Mo
    Posts
    5,673

    Re: Hall of Fame Thoughts by Chris Welsh

    Same anti saber crap different poster, different day.

  5. Likes:

    Wonderful Monds (06-30-2013)

  6. #4
    Beer is good!! George Anderson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    4,728

    Re: Hall of Fame Thoughts by Chris Welsh

    I have a very hard time believing Walsh said something that incredibly dumb.

    Or better yet he was taken out of context or misquoted.
    "Boys, I'm one of those umpires that misses 'em every once in a while so if it's close, you'd better hit it." Cal Hubbard

  7. #5
    Member 757690's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Dayton
    Posts
    9,955

    Re: Hall of Fame Thoughts by Chris Welsh

    Welsh said it, kinda, and I agree with him.

    Actually, he said that if the only thing you do is go look up the stats, you shouldn't be voting. You need to take into account many other factors that the numbers don't reveal. He said that if putting up the right stats was all that was needed, then there would be no need to vote. You could just develop a computer formula, plug in the numbers, and it would tell you who deserves to be in.
    "Man, the pitch looks fast, even in slow motion." Thom Brennaman on Chapman's fastball.

  8. #6
    Beer is good!! George Anderson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    4,728

    Re: Hall of Fame Thoughts by Chris Welsh

    Quote Originally Posted by 757690 View Post
    Welsh said it, kinda, and I agree with him.

    Actually, he said that if the only thing you do is go look up the stats, you shouldn't be voting. You need to take into account many other factors that the numbers don't reveal. He said that if putting up the right stats was all that was needed, then there would be no need to vote. You could just develop a computer formula, plug in the numbers, and it would tell you who deserves to be in.
    When you put it that way I somewhat agree, however stats should and do play a huge part to determine who is worthy and who is not.
    "Boys, I'm one of those umpires that misses 'em every once in a while so if it's close, you'd better hit it." Cal Hubbard

  9. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Cincinnati, Oh
    Posts
    73

    Re: Hall of Fame Thoughts by Chris Welsh

    But why are the numbers and stats so important.... especially the saber stats? Fred McGriff has been hosed for YEARS. With better or equal numbers to Stargell, and Perez.

    If you watched the game, McGriff was THE main cog offensively number of Championship Braves teams and his votes are in the 20% range. The whole voting system is bs.

    Don Cameron
    The overweight lover

  10. #8
    Moderator RedlegJake's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    North Kansas City, Mo
    Posts
    5,673

    Re: Hall of Fame Thoughts by Chris Welsh

    Quote Originally Posted by Don Cameron View Post
    But why are the numbers and stats so important.... especially the saber stats? Fred McGriff has been hosed for YEARS. With better or equal numbers to Stargell, and Perez.

    If you watched the game, McGriff was THE main cog offensively number of Championship Braves teams and his votes are in the 20% range. The whole voting system is bs.

    Don Cameron
    The overweight lover
    Yes the HOF vote is bs. Has been for years.
    I only disagree about stats, Don, but can see what Welch was driving at. The great ones stick out. McGriff, I also agree deserves the HoF. The stats say so. Compared to other 1st baseman Fred imo easily surpasses the bar.
    Last edited by RedlegJake; 06-30-2013 at 09:02 AM.

  11. #9
    Beer is good!! George Anderson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    4,728

    Re: Hall of Fame Thoughts by Chris Welsh

    Quote Originally Posted by RedlegJake View Post
    Yes the HOF vote is bs. Has been for years.
    I only disagree about stats, Don, but can see what Welch was driving at. The great ones stick out. McGriff, I also agree deserves the HoF. The stats say so. Compared to other 1st baseman Fred imo easily surpasses the bar.
    Mcgriffs career numbers are not HOF worthy when you consider the era he played in. Had he put those numbers up in the 70's or 80's he likely would already be in or very close.
    "Boys, I'm one of those umpires that misses 'em every once in a while so if it's close, you'd better hit it." Cal Hubbard

  12. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Cincinnati, Oh
    Posts
    73

    Re: Hall of Fame Thoughts by Chris Welsh

    Quote Originally Posted by George Anderson View Post
    Mcgriffs career numbers are not HOF worthy when you consider the era he played in. Had he put those numbers up in the 70's or 80's he likely would already be in or very close.
    So, let me get that logic straight. McGriff cannot get in because his stats fail versus his peers, and his peers can't get in because of PEDS. So, McGriff can't get in because his paltry career numbers, better than Perez and Stargell, were diminished because of steroid cheats. Oh that makes good sense.

    So, then logically, the doors to Cooperstown are open to Bonds and Clemens, who were never proven to fail a test.... as well as McGwire, Palmerio, and eventually ARod as well. Well, that does make sense.

    Don Cameron
    You have GOT TO BE KIDDING ME.

  13. #11
    Beer is good!! George Anderson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    4,728

    Re: Hall of Fame Thoughts by Chris Welsh

    Quote Originally Posted by Don Cameron View Post
    So, let me get that logic straight. McGriff cannot get in because his stats fail versus his peers, and his peers can't get in because of PEDS. So, McGriff can't get in because his paltry career numbers, better than Perez and Stargell, were diminished because of steroid cheats. Oh that makes good sense.

    So, then logically, the doors to Cooperstown are open to Bonds and Clemens, who were never proven to fail a test.... as well as McGwire, Palmerio, and eventually ARod as well. Well, that does make sense.

    Don Cameron
    You have GOT TO BE KIDDING ME.
    Please do a little research on the era and you will find it was more than steroid usage.
    "Boys, I'm one of those umpires that misses 'em every once in a while so if it's close, you'd better hit it." Cal Hubbard

  14. #12
    High five! nate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Irvine, CA
    Posts
    6,976

    Re: Hall of Fame Thoughts by Chris Welsh

    Quote Originally Posted by Don Cameron View Post
    But why are the numbers and stats so important.... especially the saber stats? Fred McGriff has been hosed for YEARS. With better or equal numbers to Stargell, and Perez.
    I think very few "saber" stats are used to elect HoF members.

    If you watched the game, McGriff was THE main cog offensively number of Championship Braves teams and his votes are in the 20% range. The whole voting system is bs.
    Maybe in '94. Otherwise, guys like Justice, Chipper, Klesko, Blauser and others were the big contributors to the Braves' offensive machine.

    While we all watch the game, no one watches ALL the games and even if it were physically possible, the brain couldn't catalog, categorize and rank the myriad events occurring during a day's worth of ballgames, let alone a season or career.

    Stats, conventional or "saber" are shorthand for that. Take away the numbers of any player and all we have is anecdotal legend.
    "Bring on Rod Stupid!"

  15. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Cincinnati, Oh
    Posts
    73

    Re: Hall of Fame Thoughts by Chris Welsh

    Quote Originally Posted by George Anderson View Post
    Please do a little research on the era and you will find it was more than steroid usage.
    I have, Georgie. But, enlighten us.... differentiate those steroid users.

    493 career home runs 10 years with 30 or more home runs, 8 years with 100 rbis or more.

    Tell me guys what do you want from your hall of famers?

  16. #14
    Moderator RedlegJake's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    North Kansas City, Mo
    Posts
    5,673

    Re: Hall of Fame Thoughts by Chris Welsh

    The debate isn't about Crime Dog though. The OP is about saber and stats to determine HoF. I don't believe saber or the newer stats are used much by voters. Counting stats are but its largely a voting based on longevity, legend and popularity. And - reviewing thd statement actually made by Welsch, you distorted and misrepresented what he actually was saying. The great ones do stand out...the numbers just verify what the eyes see. Nobody had to look at stats to tell the difference between Hank aron and Dusty Baker. One was obviously great, the other one a good solid player. Numbers just help assign them a place along that scale.

  17. #15
    Beer is good!! George Anderson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    4,728

    Re: Hall of Fame Thoughts by Chris Welsh

    Quote Originally Posted by RedlegJake View Post
    The debate isn't about Crime Dog though. The OP is about saber and stats to determine HoF. I don't believe saber or the newer stats are used much by voters. Counting stats are but its largely a voting based on longevity, legend and popularity. And - reviewing thd statement actually made by Welsch, you distorted and misrepresented what he actually was saying. The great ones do stand out...the numbers just verify what the eyes see. Nobody had to look at stats to tell the difference between Hank aron and Dusty Baker. One was obviously great, the other one a good solid player. Numbers just help assign them a place along that scale.
    Agree, the writers no question look at numbers as well they should. it would be incredibly foolish and irresponsible not to.

    Not to derail the thread but here is a good article why McGriff does not belong.

    http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/story?id=1825488

    This paragraph sums it up for me.



    3) How many first basemen from one era can go into the Hall? McGriff's career coincided all but perfectly with Mark McGwire, Rafael Palmeiro, Frank Thomas and Jeff Bagwell. Each of those players will retire with better qualifications than McGriff. (We're not even counting Eddie Murray, who arrived before him, and the Thome-Delgado-Giambi-Helton group that followed.) Even if you grant that McGriff was the fifth best first baseman of his era -- and that's debatable -- that doesn't sound like a Hall of Famer to me.
    "Boys, I'm one of those umpires that misses 'em every once in a while so if it's close, you'd better hit it." Cal Hubbard


Turn Off Ads?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.

Thank you, and most importantly, enjoy yourselves!


RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball


Contact us: Boss | GIK | BCubb2003 | dabvu2498 | Gallen5862 | LexRedsFan | Plus Plus | RedlegJake | redsfan1995 | The Operator | Tommyjohn25