Hall of Fame, Who would you vote for?

[nflman2033]

Bagwell
Larkin
Morris
Raines

What I posted about Larkin in my HOF thread:

For my money, Rock is the most underappreciated player on the ballot. Leadoff hitters are expected to be catalysts for your lineup. They’re expected to make things happen with the bat and on the base paths. Not only did Raines do this but as best I can tell he’s the second best leadoff hitter of all time. He compares favorably to Hall of Famer and leadoff man Lou Brock across the board. Raines has a higher batting average, OBP, SLG, OPS and OPS+. Especially for a leadoff hitter OBP is one of the most importants stats and it's where Raines really differentiates himself from Brock. Despite only a 1 point difference in batting average (Raines .294, Brock .293) there is a whopping 42 point discrepancy in OBP (Raines .385, Brock .343). In almost 1000 fewer plate appearances, Raines reached base more times, hit more homeruns, drove in more runs and only scored 31 fewer runs. The one area where it seems Brock has him beat is stolen bases. Brock is 2nd all-time with 938, Raines 5th with 808. Raines still comes out ahead there because he was successful on nearly 85% of his steals, best of anyone in the top 10 who played since they began keeping track of how many times players were caught stealing on a consistent basis (since 1912). Of course, this includes all-time steals leader and Raines' contemporary Rickey Henderson. At 75%, Brock is the lowest in the same group. What’s been keeping him out? Some is just plain ol’ undervaluing his accomplishments and some is backlash for admitted cocaine use. However, the latter didn’t keep Paul Molitor out of the Hall. By the way, playing in the same era as Molly, Raines also has a higher OBP and OPS+ despite a batting average of 12 points less. Raines is a case to watch, though. Support for him seems to be growing. He’s made significant jumps in the voting the last 2 years and should make another this year (37.5% last year). Look for him in the mid 40% range. He won’t get in this year, but if the trend continues he’ll really have a chance during the latter half of his HOF eligibility.

how can a yankees fan who is old enough to have watched baseball in the 80's like myself not put Don Mattingly in. Its like I said hes like a Gayle Sayers for baseball, sure his run was cut short by injury, but he was one of the best players in the game at his peak

 

[Youk]

Yeah at some point we need to decide if peak or longevity is more important. I am more of a peak guy, but I understand that you have to at least maintain your form as a competent player for a long time to even be considered.

Are guys like Mattingly more deserving than someone like Palmeiro who played forever and compiled the appropriate milestones? Or someone like Andruw Jones who fell off a cliff at 30 ... does Johnny Damon seriously end up getting more votes than AJ? Because that'd suck some major titties.

I think you need to honor both. If Johnny Damon, for example, is able to stick around for the major milestones, he should be honored with an induction.

My one problem with Andruw Jones is that he COMPLETELY fell off. He didn't have a quick, short career that was cut short. He just took a nose dive.

 

[ThomasTomasz]

As an Oriole fan, I've always appreciated Palmeiro, though his declaration of never taking steroids and then never owning up to any suspicion has left a sour taste in my mouth. So for you guys who support him, what is your explanation for Palmeiro?

 

[mcstl25]

Bagwell
Larkin
Morris
Raines

What I posted about Larkin in my HOF thread:

For my money, Rock is the most underappreciated player on the ballot. Leadoff hitters are expected to be catalysts for your lineup. They’re expected to make things happen with the bat and on the base paths. Not only did Raines do this but as best I can tell he’s the second best leadoff hitter of all time. He compares favorably to Hall of Famer and leadoff man Lou Brock across the board. Raines has a higher batting average, OBP, SLG, OPS and OPS+. Especially for a leadoff hitter OBP is one of the most importants stats and it's where Raines really differentiates himself from Brock. Despite only a 1 point difference in batting average (Raines .294, Brock .293) there is a whopping 42 point discrepancy in OBP (Raines .385, Brock .343). In almost 1000 fewer plate appearances, Raines reached base more times, hit more homeruns, drove in more runs and only scored 31 fewer runs. The one area where it seems Brock has him beat is stolen bases. Brock is 2nd all-time with 938, Raines 5th with 808. Raines still comes out ahead there because he was successful on nearly 85% of his steals, best of anyone in the top 10 who played since they began keeping track of how many times players were caught stealing on a consistent basis (since 1912). Of course, this includes all-time steals leader and Raines' contemporary Rickey Henderson. At 75%, Brock is the lowest in the same group. What’s been keeping him out? Some is just plain ol’ undervaluing his accomplishments and some is backlash for admitted cocaine use. However, the latter didn’t keep Paul Molitor out of the Hall. By the way, playing in the same era as Molly, Raines also has a higher OBP and OPS+ despite a batting average of 12 points less. Raines is a case to watch, though. Support for him seems to be growing. He’s made significant jumps in the voting the last 2 years and should make another this year (37.5% last year). Look for him in the mid 40% range. He won’t get in this year, but if the trend continues he’ll really have a chance during the latter half of his HOF eligibility.

I admit, a very compelling argument. I wonder if many people have the same issue as I do when it comes to Raines, that he was a very average player for so many years after his 5 or 6 great years. His last 14 years in the league were nowhere near hall worthy, albeit several were as a bench player in his late 30s and early 40s. That's a long time and gives people time to forget the great years.

 

[Irish]

As an Oriole fan, I've always appreciated Palmeiro, though his declaration of never taking steroids and then never owning up to any suspicion has left a sour taste in my mouth. So for you guys who support him, what is your explanation for Palmeiro?

I don't care that he used steroids and lied about it. And the stats are there.

 

[NAHSTE]

I don't care that he used steroids and lied about it. And the stats are there.

I personally don't think Palmeiro's peak was high enough.

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

I don't care that he used steroids and lied about it. And the stats are there.

I agree with this.

I don't care about the juicers, because i've concluded that it's ridiculous to castigate the guys who got caught because there are likely plenty of guys who will go in to the HOF who also used that will go to their grave without coming clean.

All I care about is what happened on the field in comparison to contemporaries and others who played the same positions. I'm over the PED's, everybody did them, and plenty are still doing them.

 

[Youk]

I agree with this.

I don't care about the juicers, because i've concluded that it's ridiculous to castigate the guys who got caught because there are likely plenty of guys who will go in to the HOF who also used that will go to their grave without coming clean.

All I care about is what happened on the field in comparison to contemporaries and others who played the same positions. I'm over the PED's, everybody did them, and plenty are still doing them.

Agree with that. I know people hate the "everybody's doing it" argument, but you cannot compare players in that era without thinking steroids.

 

[Irish]

I personally don't think Palmeiro's peak was high enough.

I'm not much of a peak guy. I value stats the most when it comes to the HOF. I like consistency. Palmeiro's key stats of over 3000 hits, 569 HRs, 585 doubles and 10th all time in total bases, are all HOF worthy in my opinion, even if he was never the most dangerous hitter on the field all the time.

And I stand with W2BTD, in that I don't care that he used steroids. I can't speak for who has or hasn't, so I just don't care. Him lying about it is nothing more than trying to save face. But it doesn't matter to me anyway because I don't care how honorable the person was. I'd put a murderer in if he hit 600 homeruns. I vote for the best baseball players.

 

[FedEx227]

I agree with this.

I don't care about the juicers, because i've concluded that it's ridiculous to castigate the guys who got caught because there are likely plenty of guys who will go in to the HOF who also used that will go to their grave without coming clean.

All I care about is what happened on the field in comparison to contemporaries and others who played the same positions. I'm over the PED's, everybody did them, and plenty are still doing them.

For the record, I said this about 3-4 years ago on VSN and got ripped to shreds. Just wanna throw that out there. :marshmellow:

 

[FedEx227]

Also Barry Larkin receiving more votes in this poll than Larry Walker is really disheartening. I think Larkin should totally be in but there are bigger obvious shoe-ins in this poll than him.

 

[Irish]

With Larkin being said, I really don't think his stats are at my HOF levels I like, but Warner has made pretty good arguments for him at this point that my idea of him is probably skewed. I am usually very stingy.

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

Also Barry Larkin receiving more votes in this poll than Larry Walker is really disheartening. I think Larkin should totally be in but there are bigger obvious shoe-ins in this poll than him.

Coors, dude. The stigma is strong.

 

[FedEx227]

It's silly but understandable. Also I think Tim Raines should be way more of a shoe-in, only 13 votes makes me pretty sad.

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

With Larkin being said, I really don't think his stats are at my HOF levels I like, but Warner has made pretty good arguments for him at this point that my idea of him is probably skewed. I am usually very stingy.

The thing about Larkin, is he stacks up just fine against other HOF SS, particularly the ones who came before him. Especially in the metrics, where he ranks among the greatest SS's ever.

What hurts him is injuries took a toll on his career totals (which is where the eyes of judgement usually fall when glancing at the back of the digital baseball card), and the guys who came after him changed the perception of what a SS could do offensively. His numbers only looked special for a couple of years before the ARod/Nomaaah/Tejada era made everyone forget.

When you can only name 3 or 4 players at a given position who are definitely better than the player in question, I find it hard to say that player isn't HOF worthy.

Larkin is basically a far less durable, far better fielding version of Derek Jeter. I like Larkin's baserunning a little better (one of the most efficient basestealers of all time, and great numbers in the wacky extra base/baserunning stats if you buy into those), too.

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

It's silly but understandable. Also I think Tim Raines should be way more of a shoe-in, only 13 votes makes me pretty sad.

His real life vote totals are astounding to me, and it's Raines' and Walker's lack of support from the writers that have me so disgusted with the whole process.

They don't even come close in the voting.

I mean, did these guys really watch these players play? It's mind boggling.

 

[FedEx227]

I'm sorry i'm not more active in this thread but honestly I gave up the fight about the baseball hall of fame probably 2 years ago. It's just so mind boggling stupid, the voting process is arbitrary and outdated and it's just frustrating to see great players thought of as less than great because a group of writers have various agendas and voting processes.

There is literally no way to look at Raines' numbers and not say he's a hall of famer, no way at all.

 

[Youk]

It blows my mind looking at all of these fucking articles that come out about who is voting for who. I don't see the difficulties that some of these writers are having. The statistics are the exact same whether I'm looking at it or dipshit writer #1 is looking at it. Looking at Raines, solely based off of his stats, you gotta think that these guys are just looking at hits and batting average. He's a few ticks under .300 and 3000, but so fucking what? Look at the stolen bases, the on base percentage, fuck, even look at the WAR if you want to bring up stats. The fact that he's only received 37.5% of the vote last year, I just don't get it. Also, there is no reason for someone not to be a "first ballot" hall of famer. I understand people may be convinced over years about a players worthiness, but any writer who uses the excuse "well, I just don't see him as a first ballot, so I didn't vote for him" is ridiculous.

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

It blows my mind looking at all of these fucking articles that come out about who is voting for who. I don't see the difficulties that some of these writers are having. The statistics are the exact same whether I'm looking at it or dipshit writer #1 is looking at it. Looking at Raines, solely based off of his stats, you gotta think that these guys are just looking at hits and batting average. He's a few ticks under .300 and 3000, but so fucking what? Look at the stolen bases, the on base percentage, fuck, even look at the WAR if you want to bring up stats. The fact that he's only received 37.5% of the vote last year, I just don't get it. Also, there is no reason for someone not to be a "first ballot" hall of famer. I understand people may be convinced over years about a players worthiness, but any writer who uses the excuse "well, I just don't see him as a first ballot, so I didn't vote for him" is ridiculous.

EXACTLY

My pet peeve.

Either you think he's a HOF or you don't. None of this "let's make him wait a year" shit. Drives me nuts.

 

[FirstTimer]

The thing about Larkin, is he stacks up just fine against other HOF SS, particularly the ones who came before him. Especially in the metrics, where he ranks among the greatest SS's ever.

What hurts him is injuries took a toll on his career totals (which is where the eyes of judgement usually fall when glancing at the back of the digital baseball card), and the guys who came after him changed the perception of what a SS could do offensively. His numbers only looked special for a couple of years before the ARod/Nomaaah/Tejada era made everyone forget.

When you can only name 3 or 4 players at a given position who are definitely better than the player in question, I find it hard to say that player isn't HOF worthy.

.

So Larkin is Ron Santo?

It blows my mind looking at all of these fucking articles that come out about who is voting for who. I don't see the difficulties that some of these writers are having. The statistics are the exact same whether I'm looking at it or dipshit writer #1 is looking at it. Looking at Raines, solely based off of his stats, you gotta think that these guys are just looking at hits and batting average. He's a few ticks under .300 and 3000, but so fucking what? Look at the stolen bases, the on base percentage, fuck, even look at the WAR if you want to bring up stats. The fact that he's only received 37.5% of the vote last year, I just don't get it. Also, there is no reason for someone not to be a "first ballot" hall of famer. I understand people may be convinced over years about a players worthiness, but any writer who uses the excuse "well, I just don't see him as a first ballot, so I didn't vote for him" is ridiculous.

Technically WAR isn't a stat. :lesmug: