Larkin enshrined in Cooperstown!
Collapse
X
-
-
Comment
-
I get the whole "well they are doing it for their friends" "token vote" stuff. But for a group of people that can't be bothered to look at numbers it seems really silly that they have time to get votes in for their buds. It's not a major problem with the HOF voting probably Problem #1,012 but still...Comment
-
Can anyone also explain why THIS guy was unable to stay on the ballot?
.276/.363/.426, 17 HR, 73 RBI, 69.7 WAR, 116 OPS+
Yet in his second year Larkin (.295/.371/.444, 15 HR, 71 RBI, 68.9 WAR, 116 OPS+) was able to make it.
The stat line above is Lou Whitaker.Comment
-
Roberto Alomar: 2320 g at 2B, 116 OPS+, 63.5 WAR, 7 teams. Famous misdeed: Spat at umpire. Result: 2nd-ballot HOFer. Sweet Lou: 2308 g at 2B, 116 OPS+, 69.7 WAR, 1 team. Famous misdeed: Forgot uniform at 1985 ASG. Result: 2.9% of HOF vote. Go figure...Comment
-
Both are better, but no reason they should've been 2nd and 3rd ballot HOF while Lou falls off the ballot.
Insanity.Comment
-
I agree that Whitaker deserved far more consideration than he received but we're really comparing apples & oranges. A better comparison would be why Trammell, a fellow SS receives so little support. Both of those guys are underappreciated, imho.Comment
-
For starters, Larkin is widely considered among the 5-10 best players of all time at his position (same for Alomar to use another 2B) while Whitaker is not. Another reason is that Whitaker's time on the ballot came before there was a big push to really use metrics to evaluate players. At that time it was something only a few did. Looking at OBP and possibly SLG is as advanced as it got. NO ONE with a vote looked at WAR, OPS+ or even OPS as a way to measure performance. So if you're counting numbers don't look Hall-worthy at first glance that was it unless you had the aura and flash of Ozzie Smith which Whitaker did not. Who did? Had Bagwell hit the ballot back when Whitaker did, I wouldn't be surprised to see him suffer the same fate.
I agree that Whitaker deserved far more consideration than he received but we're really comparing apples & oranges. A better comparison would be why Trammell, a fellow SS receives so little support. Both of those guys are underappreciated, imho.
I think Bagwell would have been a first ballot lock if not for steroid suspicions.Comment
-
I knew that Larkin won 9 Silver Slugger awards, but i heard on MLBnetwork today that the only Infielder who has won more is A-RodComment
-
For starters, Larkin is widely considered among the 5-10 best players of all time at his position (same for Alomar to use another 2B) while Whitaker is not. Another reason is that Whitaker's time on the ballot came before there was a big push to really use metrics to evaluate players. At that time it was something only a few did. Looking at OBP and possibly SLG is as advanced as it got. NO ONE with a vote looked at WAR, OPS+ or even OPS as a way to measure performance. So if you're counting numbers don't look Hall-worthy at first glance that was it unless you had the aura and flash of Ozzie Smith which Whitaker did not. Who did? Had Bagwell hit the ballot back when Whitaker did, I wouldn't be surprised to see him suffer the same fate.
I agree that Whitaker deserved far more consideration than he received but we're really comparing apples & oranges. A better comparison would be why Trammell, a fellow SS receives so little support. Both of those guys are underappreciated, imho.
I get your point completely and that comes from different ideas of what Hall of Fame standards are. But to punish and reward for the all-time depth of a position just seems beyond silly to me.Comment
-
I know he's on the Mitchell Report, but I'm actually astounded that Juan Gone is officially off the ballot. While I don't think he'd make it, I thought he'd be Mattingly-esque in the voting.
Looks like Bags will make it in a few years (maybe 2016, after a lot of the big names go), and Raines may go around then, too.
ETA: Looking at the voting, Morris is up 13.2%. It's possible he goes next year, or makes it in year 15. Bags was up 14.3%, and Raines 13.2%. Of course, this is a very weak year. It may just be that Morris goes with the Vets committee.UglyChristmasLights.com - Celebrating 10 years with the 2011 collection!Comment
Comment