Larry Walker: Hall of Famer?

[NAHSTE]

Instead of a steroid issue, this one is a ballpark issue. He put up some monster seasons, which stand up with the greatest hitting campaigns of all time, but one can't mention Walker's impressive numbers without mentioning that he played in pre-humidor Coors Field.

Slugged .700 twice, each time with matching OBPs over .450. His 1997 MVP season is jaw-dropping - .366/.452/.720 with 49 HR, 132 RBI and 33 SB. His OPS+, which is adjusted for ballpark, was 178 that year.

He didn't have much longevity, was hurt a lot, and only finished with 383 homers, but his peak years were up there with anyone in the game. Also finished career with 7 gold glove awards.

162 game average:
.313/.400/.565, 31 HR, 107 RBI, 19 SB, 140 OPS+


Does Larry Walker belong in the Hall of Fame?

 

[NAHSTE]

I voted yes, but accidentally clicked no ... luckily I can edit the results.

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

A definate yes.

Led the league in batting 3 times, and had years where he hit .366 & .338 and didnt win. Hit over .350 four times, including a .379 year. OPS over 1.000 five times. Led the league in HR's. A tremendous defensive player who earned his gold gloves (7th all time in OF assists) Hit a million doubles, and was putting up monster OPS+ numbers into his late 30's. Stole 200+ bases.

Easily one of the best of his era.

 

[NAHSTE]

A definate yes.

Led the league in batting 3 times, and had years where he hit .366 & .338 and didnt win. Hit over .350 four times, including a .379 year. OPS over 1.000 five times. Led the league in HR's. A tremendous defensive player who earned his gold gloves (7th all time in OF assists) Hit a million doubles, and was putting up monster OPS+ numbers into his late 30's. Stole 200+ bases.

Easily one of the best of his era.

I think so too, but these 90s era guys are having a hard time due to how numb we have all become to offensive numbers. Those are some absurd stats but they don't stand out quite like they should.

He also will probably get knocked a bit for his durability, he only played one full season it seems like. Barely got to 130 or 140 games in all but one year. I think he'll get in once people realize how good he was at his peak, but not having 500 (or even 400) will hurt. As will the Coors factor.

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

To me, the Coors factor means nothing, because his outstanding OPS+ takes care of that. Guys like Vinny Castilla and Dante Bichette were Coors frauds, not Walker.

 

[NAHSTE]

To me, the Coors factor means nothing, because his outstanding OPS+ takes care of that. Guys like Vinny Castilla and Dante Bichette were Coors frauds, not Walker.

Damn, I just checked his home/away splits for 1997 ... and you're absolutely right, he mashed away from Coors too.

Home: 20 HR, 68 RBI, .384/.460/.709
Away: 29 HR, 62 RBI, .346/.443/.733

He's probably one of the greatest all-around players of all time. That 1997 season is unfuckingreal.

 

[EmpireWF]

Hell yeah

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

Hell yeah

Needs a Steve Ausin gif

 

[SuperKevin]

Big minus for being Canadian though

 

[Kuzzy Powers]

Glad to see Larry getting his much deserved love here. Easily a HOFer IMO. One of the best pure hitters ive ever seen.

 

[dell71]

Damn, I just checked his home/away splits for 1997 ... and you're absolutely right, he mashed away from Coors too.

Home: 20 HR, 68 RBI, .384/.460/.709
Away: 29 HR, 62 RBI, .346/.443/.733

He's probably one of the greatest all-around players of all time. That 1997 season is unfuckingreal.

Dammit, I hate to be such a naysayer in all these HOF threads but Walker is another no from me. Let's start with the bolded part: :laughing:

Okay, on to the splits. They absolutely devalue his resume. He's not the fraud that Dante Bichette was but isn't some all time great either. Sure, 1997 was great but his entire career tells the real story:

Larry Williams|G|H|2B|3B|HR|RBI|BA|OBP|SLG|OPS
@ Coors Field|597|814|178|31|154|521| .381 | .462 | .710 | 1.172
Everywhere Else|1391|1346|293|31|229|790| .282 | .372 | .501 | .873

To simplify:

Williams per 162 game Avg|H|2B|3B|HR|RBI
@ Coors Field|221|48|8|42|141
Everywhere Else|157|34|4|27|92

Bottom line, he was a good, but not great player in any ballpark. However, he was a superhero in Coors. What the hell would Griffey have done playing his prime there? No dice from me on Walker.

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

Sorry, but OPS+ takes care of the Coors debate.

Walker 140
Griffey 135

Knocking Walker for playing in Coors is weak, lazy analysis. He killed the ball everywhere. I dont know how you can say he wasnt a "geat hitter in any ballpark" when his OPS is Coors was over 1.000, and his OPS everywhere else was nearly .900. What defines "great" to you?

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

dell, I thought I was a hard marker. Youare a lot tougher than me.

Did you check out the 2011 HOF eligible list thread? Go fill it out, im curious about your takes.

 

[dell71]

Sorry, but OPS+ takes care of the Coors debate.

Walker 140
Griffey 135

Knocking Walker for playing in Coors is weak, lazy analysis. He killed the ball everywhere. I dont know how you can say he wasnt a "geat hitter in any ballpark" when his OPS is Coors was over 1.000, and his OPS everywhere else was nearly .900. What defines "great" to you?

My point in knocking him is if you took those 600 games he played at Coors and applied what he did elsewhere to them, he has far different career numbers. You can knock off about 240 hits, 60 homers, 180 rbi and adjust the metrics down, accordingly. Then, we're talking about a guy who had a good career but barely 300+ homers and 1000+ rbi with less than 2000 hits and couldn't really stay healthy. Those 600 games at Coors are about 30% of the total number of games he played, yet they account for nearly 40% of his production across the board. BTW, I don't subscribe to the theory that all is settled by OPS+, especially in this case since it's inflated by the launching pad he used to play in.

dell, I thought I was a hard marker. Youare a lot tougher than me.

Did you check out the 2011 HOF eligible list thread? Go fill it out, im curious about your takes.

Getting ready to turn in...have to check out that thread tomorrow.

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

My point in knocking him is if you took those 600 games he played at Coors and applied what he did elsewhere to them, he has far different career numbers. You can knock off about 240 hits, 60 homers, 180 rbi and adjust the metrics down, accordingly. Then, we're talking about a guy who had a good career but barely 300+ homers and 1000+ rbi with less than 2000 hits and couldn't really stay healthy. Those 600 games at Coors are about 30% of the total number of games he played, yet they account for nearly 40% of his production across the board. BTW, I don't subscribe to the theory that all is settled by OPS+, especially in this case since it's inflated by the launching pad he used to play in.

Oh, don't get me wrong, i'm the LAST guy to base an argument on OPS+ alone. I made a long post in another thread breaking down why that stat can lie sometimes. But his OPS+ isnt inflated by Coors, because the park effects are part of the formula.

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

Here is my OPS+ diatribe from the Dawson thread:

http://www.vsndaily.com/showpost.php?p=1002349&postcount=36

 

[dell71]

Oh, don't get me wrong, i'm the LAST guy to base an argument on OPS+ alone. I made a long post in another thread breaking down why that stat can lie sometimes. But his OPS+ isnt inflated by Coors, because the park effects are part of the formula.

I understand how it works...nice post in the Dawson thread, btw. However, there is inflation in regards to Walker. Because he did so well at Coors he put some gargantuan numbers. Thus, at the end of the season he's still judged as a guy who hit high 30s & 40s homers and well over 120 rbi with a BA way over .300. Had he not had the benefit of that ballpark, he would be judged as a guy who hit high 20s, low 30s HR, 90s to low 100s rbi hitting between .280 & .300. I don't think they're even remotely the same.

 

[Senser81]

Putting Larry Walker in the HOF will open the floodgates for other Canadian 'borderline' players, like Fat Stairs and Steve Wilson.

I vote no.

 

[FedEx227]

I'm not seeing your point though, dell.

Yeah his counting stats likely were helped by Coors Field, nobody is denying that. But when you take a more intricate stat like OPS+, which regulates for league and park factors, Walker stacks up as an all-time great.

 

[Senser81]

Dammit, I hate to be such a naysayer in all these HOF threads but Walker is another no from me. Let's start with the bolded part: :laughing:

Okay, on to the splits. They absolutely devalue his resume. He's not the fraud that Dante Bichette was but isn't some all time great either. Sure, 1997 was great but his entire career tells the real story:

Larry Williams|G|H|2B|3B|HR|RBI|BA|OBP|SLG|OPS
@ Coors Field|597|814|178|31|154|521| .381 | .462 | .710 | 1.172
Everywhere Else|1391|1346|293|31|229|790| .282 | .372 | .501 | .873

To simplify:

Williams per 162 game Avg|H|2B|3B|HR|RBI
@ Coors Field|221|48|8|42|141
Everywhere Else|157|34|4|27|92

Bottom line, he was a good, but not great player in any ballpark. However, he was a superhero in Coors. What the hell would Griffey have done playing his prime there? No dice from me on Walker.

Who is Larry Williams? That guy was awesome.