| 0 |
Subject: Hall of Fame
Posted by: blue hen
- Leader [22100300] Sun, Dec 01, 2002, 00:10
The complete ballot (x-first time eligible): Bert Blyleven, x-Brett Butler, Gary Carter, x-Vince Coleman, Dave Concepcion, x-Darren Daulton, x-Mark Davis, Andre Dawson, x-Sid Fernandez, Steve Garvey, Rich Gossage, Keith Hernandez, x-Rick Honeycutt, x-Danny Jackson, Tommy John, Jim Kaat, x-Darryl Kile, Don Mattingly, Jack Morris, Dale Murphy, x-Eddie Murray, Dave Parker, x-Tony Pena, Jim Rice, x-Ryne Sandberg, x-Lee Smith, Bruce Sutter, x-Danny Tartabull, x-Mickey Tettleton, Alan Trammell, x-Fernando Valenzuela, x-Mitch Williams, x-Todd Worrell.
Lee Smith, Eddie Murray, and Ryne Sandberg should be shoo-ins. I really don't think there's a reasonable explanation for all three not getting in.
There are very reasonable arguments for Blyleven, Carter, Dawson, John, Kaat, Morris, Murphy, Parker, Rice, Sutter, and Trammell.
Mattingly has been discussed aplenty in these parts. He does not deserve it, in my opinion, but I respect the man and his legion of fans.
Several other guys had multiple HOF seasons, like Tartabull, Coleman, Hernandez, Valenzuela, Jackson, Gossage, and even Tettleton and perhaps Butler. But none of them deserves much support (I think Hernandez will get the most support of that group).
Mark Davis and Todd Worrell both have about a zillion trivia questions about them. But no votes between em.
And lastly, no support for my personal favorites, Darren Daulton and Mitch Williams. |
| 1 | JeffG
Sustainer
ID: 40451227
Mon, Dec 02, 2002, 16:40
|
If my opinion counted, I'd vote for Eddie Murray, Gary Carter, and Jim Rice.
Ryne Sandberg and Lee Smith are HOF caliber players but I would be more selective with first year candidates than the BBWA seems to be.
Gossage was a great closer and maybe I would also call HOF caliber from the current group of candidates.
From the rest of the list, Parker and Mattingly had great careers and I am sure have better stats than some in the hall, but sorry to say should be on the outside looking in. (Of course if Donny ever made it, I'd be very happy from the Yankee fan point of view).
|
| 2 | Seattle Zen
Donor
ID: 554192913
Mon, Dec 02, 2002, 17:09
|
Rice, Blyleven, Eddie Murray.
|
| 3 | blue hen
Leader
ID: 710321114
Mon, Dec 02, 2002, 17:47
|
My actual ballot reads:
Ryne Sandberg
Eddie Murray
Lee Smith
Bert Blyleven
Gary Carter
One issue that creeps up is longevity. I don't think Murray had a single season that can compare with any of Mattingly's 3 best. And Murphy? Even better than that. But when looking at the total package, Murray was "among the best" for a VERY long time.
|
| 4 | Myboyjack
Leader
ID: 14826271
Mon, Dec 02, 2002, 20:19
|
Jack Morris and Bruce Sutter sould be added to that list, BH.
|
| 5 | Perm Dude
Leader
ID: 710162916
Mon, Dec 02, 2002, 20:31
|
Murray better defines HOF by that longevity standard. I don't think there is any such thing as a "HOF season." The standard for the Hall should be excellence over time. The best HOF candidates combine this with a dominance at their position (Carter fits this, as does BB).
Some interesting names on the list. All very good players in their own way, but I'd only go with Rice, Murray, and Carter this year.
pd
|
| 6 | blue hen
Leader
ID: 710321114
Tue, Dec 03, 2002, 11:12
|
Well, Sandberg was discussed as the greatest 2B of all time during his peak. He was regarded as the best fielding 2B of his era and his hitting stats were pretty great. He hit 30 homers in 1989 and 40 homers in 1990, and those were pitcher-favorable years. And he played long enough to get some good counting stats. No-brainer, to me.
Smith was the best closer in baseball (Eck notwithstanding) for a long time. He has both counting stats and brilliance. Also a no-brainer.
Morris was good for about 3 years in the mid-80's, so-so for a few years, and then had two great years in the early 90's. Plus he had the 2nd greatest postseason pitching performance of all time, especially when you consider the era he did it in. He gets my support, but not enough.
I disagree with the statement that there's no such thing as a HOF season. If a guy plods along for a long time, I don't see as much value in that as I do in a guy like Murphy, who single-handedly led his team to the playoffs in 1982. He had 3 or 4 "team-carrying seasons" while Murray always had help. That said, Murray's counting stats are much better than Murph's and he wasn't exactly "bad" in his brilliance factor.
|
| 7 | BillB
Sustainer
ID: 481144310
Tue, Dec 03, 2002, 12:00
|
Murray
Rhino
Rice
Sutter
Carter
Toughest omission: Dawson
If Fisk is in, so is Carter.
Sutter became the NL's first premier closer (like Fingers in the AL), so I like him over Smith.
Murray, Sandberg...no brainers.
Blyleven? Given the harsh remarks he has made in the past about the voting system the only way he makes it in is by buying a ticket.
|
| 8 | Toral
Sustainer
ID: 2111201313
Tue, Dec 03, 2002, 20:16
|
1. Most obvious choices:
Carter, Sandberg.
Pretty clear choices:
Murray, Blyleven.
2. 2 Terrible Choices That Can Be Used To Separate Knowledgeable People From Ah, Other People:
Gold: Jim Rice. Hit a lot of homers when Fenway was still a hitter's park; not as good a player as folks like Roy White, Jose Cruz. Might as well put Greg Luzinski in at the same time.
Silver: Jack Morris.
3. Other Comments
Best relief ace of those eligible is Gossage.
Arguments can be made for:
Concepcion, Dawson, John, Kaat, Murphy, Smith, Trammell.
Toral
|
| 9 | BillB
Sustainer
ID: 481144310
Tue, Dec 03, 2002, 20:23
|
"Fenway when it was a hitters park"..Roy White?...Cruz?
Toral, I expect better compare and contrast than that!
|
| 10 | Toral
Sustainer
ID: 2111201313
Tue, Dec 03, 2002, 20:26
|
OK, BillB: what standards do you want to use?
Toral
|
| 11 | BillB
Sustainer
ID: 481144310
Tue, Dec 03, 2002, 20:53
|
Toral, comparing Jim Rice to Roy White? Jose Cruz??
So Rice didn't have that bombastic 600 Club built in the '90's to deal with...should that be held against him?
Oh, and you give props to Blyleven as a clear choice? Wow....
|
| 12 | Perm Dude
Leader
ID: 710162916
Tue, Dec 03, 2002, 22:52
|
Re: Jim Rice
While it's true that he played in a "hitters' park," it's also true that, except for his last two seasons, he hit better at Fenway than the league's batters (including his own team). So while you might expect some offensive "bumps" his production can't be explained just by the place he played half his games. Park adjusted stats still show him to be at the top of the league nearly his entire career.
pd
|
| 13 | chode
ID: 1810431921
Wed, Dec 04, 2002, 00:51
|
Tommy John!
|
| 14 | blue hen
Leader
ID: 22100300
Wed, Dec 04, 2002, 01:17
|
I put Rice well ahead of the two guys you compare him to. Cruz's best seasons were equal to Rice's norms. And then there's that 1978 season. I really never got to see either one play until they were skeletons of themselves, so I'm just going on numbers.
If I was going on numbers alone, though, Morris would clearly be out. I'm convinced.
Tommy John's an interesting one. He clearly made contributions to the game that went beyond his play on the field, and besides that, his counting stats are right up there. I could probably put him on Blyleven's level with the right evidence.
|
| 15 | blue hen
Leader
ID: 22100300
Wed, Dec 04, 2002, 01:25
|
I take that back about Tommy John. Blyleven is WAY ahead of him. Take out 1977-80 for John and he's just couple games over .500. Granted, that's a pretty big chunk to take out, but that was really the only time John could be described as dominant. Blyleven had a whole bunch of dominating years.
|
| 16 | Perm Dude
Leader
ID: 710162916
Wed, Dec 04, 2002, 08:50
|
I remember Blyleven's 1984 season for what should have been an excellent Indians team (Joe Carter, Hargrove, Thorton, Butler, Nixon, Sutcliffe). He still won 19 games for a team that won only 75.
I watched him in his Indians years, when there were a number of other good pitchers around him (Barker, Waits, etc) and his curveball put him head & shoulders above the rest. In 16 seasons, he finished in the top 10 in strikeouts 15 times (13 times in the top 5).
I was very pleased when he went to the WS with the Twins and got a ring.
pd
|
| 17 | Toral
Sustainer
ID: 2111201313
Wed, Dec 04, 2002, 09:19
|
Let's look at the stats for the 3 players I connected. We'll look at Baseball Prospectus's baseball cards section for sabrmetric analysis because it's free and easily accessible. Here's the link. 2 of their stats are releavnt. EqA takes all offensive contributions (average, walks, power, peripheral stuff like GDP) adjusted for park effects and converts them to a metric similar to batting average, i.e., .300 is real good. Wins Above Replacement Level assesses career contributions.
Jim Rice .298 92.6
Jose Cruz .290 96.1
Roy White .291 85.2
So Jim Rice was arguably a better hitter than these two, though Cruz had more career value. White shortened his career by going off to Japan where he became one of the best-loved Americans to play there. And since Rice was no fielder and the other 2 were, the difference between the two diminishes.
Or we could look at Total Baseball's Adjusted Batting Wins, in which Rice ranks behind such luminaries as Reggie Smith, Frank Howard, Ken Singleton, Rusty Staub, Joe Torre and, of course, Dwight Evans who was a better player and hitter but who disappeared off the HoF ballot his first year.
My real point is -- the 3 were quite comparable players in value, and no-one is suggesting that Roy White or Jose Cruz Sr. go in the HoF. Rice had a Frank Thomas-like career except worse in that every year but one of his after age 26 was a disappointment. Year after year people kept waiting for the old Jim Rice, the Rice of 1977 and 78, to re-emerge but it never happened. . Park adjusted stats still show him to be at the top of the league nearly his entire career. In double plays, yes; GIDP was the one thing in which he truly excelled. But he was not among the top hitters in the league in the last 9 years he played, except for 1983. To some extent this is obscured by his RBI counts, but RBI are a very situation-dependent stat; anyone batting cleanup on a good hitting team will have lots of RBI.
If Rice makes it he owes it to Fenway Park and to his stereotype. He looks like a slugger at the plate as much as anyone who played the game. He was truly fearsome looking at the plate. Ordinarily that kind of image can hurt a player -- he was mean in the clubhouse as well and more of a team cancer than a team leader -- but in this case it may push him over the top into the HoF.
Toral
|
| 18 | Perm Dude
Leader
ID: 710162916
Wed, Dec 04, 2002, 09:49
|
Rice's expectations were very high, but you seem to be making the "stock market argument" for him (Companies in the stock market who only meet or just surpass goals are downgraded, even if the goals are high. Companies which blow away goals. even goals set low, are blown up in "value").
Yet even at the age of 33 (his last full season) he managed to finish third in MVP voting with a .324 BA, 200 hits, and so on.
Yup, batting cleanup on a good team will get you RBI chances. Oddly, the fact that he delivered on those RBI chances seems to diminish him in your analysis.
pd
|
| 19 | blue hen
Leader
ID: 710321114
Wed, Dec 04, 2002, 12:16
|
You'll note that Rice wasn't listed on my ballot. So I agree with you. But I do put him ahead of those two other guys. Fielding doesn't mean as much if you're an outfielder.
|
| 20 | Seattle Zen
Donor
ID: 554192913
Wed, Dec 04, 2002, 14:57
|
Jim Rice is a Hall of Fame player, period.
He put up the best numbers of any American League player from 1975-1984, only Mike Schimdt had better numbers. He was the most feared batter in the AL for at least 5 years 1975-1980.
I don't have the time or inclination to find a baseball stat site to collaberate this, I remember reading this many years ago.
The big difference between Rice and Eddie Murray is that Murray played well for so much longer.
Simply mentioning Jose Cruz and Roy White in the same sentance as Rice completely invalidates EqA in my mind.
Sandburg and Carter are obvious choices, yet 500 HR 3000 hit Murray is not "obvious"? Who is really "sepreated" from those who are "knowledgeable"?
|
| 21 | Toral
Sustainer
ID: 2111201313
Wed, Dec 04, 2002, 16:09
|
I don't have the time or inclination to find a baseball stat site to collaberate this, I remember reading this many years ago. I didn't know World Net Daily had a baseball site ;)
He put up the best numbers of any American League player from 1975-1984, only Mike Schimdt had better numbers. He was the most feared batter in the AL for at least 5 years 1975-1980.
Well, first let's forget about 1975 and 1976, Rice's early years. He had an excellent rookie season in 1975, but even so there were 20 or more better position players in the AL in both years. These were fine seasons *considering his age*. And he wasn't "feared" at this point. So if you want a 5-year peak peiord you'll have to take 1977-81.
We then come upon Rice's big years, the ones that made the reputation Rice coasted on the rest of his career. I used BP and TB figures earlier, so I'll switch to James' Win Shares -- just to show that all serious sabrmetrics systems come up with the same sort of conclusion. I will acknowledge that Rice was at least the fourth best offensive player in the AL in 1977, and was the best in 1978. But that's not enough to get him in yet. Dale Murphy was the best offensive player in the NL for four years in a row in the 80s, more dominant than Rice, but he ain't on your ballot.
After 1978, he may well have been the most feared hitter in the AL for the reasons I outlined -- but he wasn't anywhere near the best. Here's a possibly incomplete listing of better or equal value position players (this includes defence) in the subsequent years, by the Win Shares method:
1979: 6 -- Ken Singleton, Fred Lynn, Don Baylor, Bobby Grich, George Brett, Darrell Porter.
1980: Bad season, at least 30 guys were better, forget this one.
1981: at least 21 position players were better,
1982: at least 24 position players were better,
1983: a good year, even so he was no better than the 3rd best hitter in the league; WS has 9 position players better;
1984-85: foregtaboutit, dozens of players better;
1986: last big year. 6 position players better.
rest of career: nothing.
Actually his record is worse than I expected. pd, how do you concludePark adjusted stats still show him to be at the top of the league nearly his entire career.?
So we have a guy with 2 or 3 really big years as a hitter, 2 or 3 very good ones, and a lot of years when he may have been "feared" but didn't actually produce much for a supposed HOFer.
Simply mentioning Jose Cruz and Roy White in the same sentance as Rice completely invalidates EqA in my mind. Well that leaves two possibilities. It could be that EqA is a useless, highly self-overrated baseball analysis device that relies too heavily on faulty and lazy methodology and should not be relied upon.
Or....
Toral
|
| 22 | BillB
Sustainer
ID: 341130519
Thu, Dec 05, 2002, 20:49
|
Toral, if Jim Ed didn't get a broken hand in Sept '75, he would have had EITHER AL ROTY or MVP, and possibly would have made a major difference in the WS vs. Reds - this last point is moot, but the former would have weighed more in his favor for HOF considerations. Rice's stats stand out considering the offensive stars on those teams he played on in those years (Lynn, Fisk [HOF], Yaz [HOF], Evans) than Cruz OR White.
How does that EqA put that into its equation?
|
| 23 | Toral
Sustainer
ID: 2111201313
Thu, Dec 05, 2002, 21:48
|
BillB:
(1)Jim Rice had a fine, fine season, in 1975. In many other years he would have been ROY. But he had the bad luck to be playing beside another rookie who was a comparable hitter -- I'll just say that for the moment -- and also a fine defensive center fielder, while Jim Rice was defensively just being Jim Rice. I also believe that you are correct that at the time of his injury, it was considered up in the air who would be ROY. But, look, I described Rice and Lynn as comparable hitters, but really they weren't, in 1975. Rice: .309/.350/.491. Lynn .331/.401/.566. 50 points OBP, 70 points slugging -- I don't think Rice would really have had a ROY or MVP chance. (EqAs: Rice .295, Lynn .330).
I don't get the point of the hitting comparison between Rice and the other Sox stars. Yes Rice was a better hitter than Yaz when Yaz was 50 years old or whatever. He was *not* a better hitter than Dwight Evans (EqA .300). His production stats look a little better, but they don't show Rice's bad peripheral stats that people ignore -- particularly his GIDP rate, which is one of the highest in history. He wasn't a distinctively better offensive player than Lynn (EqA .300) either. Sure if you compare Rice's good years with Lynn's bad ones, Rice looks better -- but Lynn's 1979 season was considerably better than any season Jim Rice ever had. And Lynn isn't in the HoF, nor is Evans.
(2) As to the general point that Rice might have improved his HoF credentials had he not been injured, that falls under the category of "tough bananas". You can say that about hundreds of players.
(3) I am happy to concede that Rice may have been a better player than White or Cruz. But by only a little bit -- and the point of my comparison is that RTice was only a little better *hitter* than 2 people many current baseball fans may never even have heard of. Rice can go into the Hall of the Very Good ahead of White and Cruz if you want-- but for the HoF he's competing against a much higher calibre of player. There's an interesting list of most comparable stats players at baseball-reference.com. Top is Orlando Cepeda, who probably doesn't belong in the HOF either. And ther list also includes comparable-position HOFers like Stargell and Williams -- but also people like Chili Davis. That's what Rice was as a player -- at 21.9 WS/162 (James' stat), he's halfway between your Stargell or Williams (25.4, 24.4) and Chili Davis (19.0)
4. Noticed Neyer's column today, and he mentions Jim Rice only as someone whom Dale Murphy, who he regards as a marginal candidate, is better than. I imagine he thinks there's no point arguing Rice because (1) Rice doesn't have a serious case, at least to those who accept sabrmetric analysis, but (2)you will never convince his supporters, because, like Mattingly's, they are choosing based on mental pictures and images (Mattingly, great clubhouse leader; Rice, feared slugger), and are not into rational argument -- I am not saying they're dumb, but they just don't want to decide these things by rational anaysis.
Toral
|
| 24 | BillB
Sustainer
ID: 81145722
Sun, Dec 08, 2002, 00:06
|
My point was that it is easier to be noticed in a lineup of "JAG" (Just Another Guys) than in a lineup of fearsome offensive threats. Hey, Butch freakin Hobson had 30 HR and 112 RBI in '78 as the regular 9th hitter in addition to the Evans, Lynn, Yaz, etc, etc...
Who was Cruz' lineup comparison...Roger Metzger?
Not having a busted hand may not have given Jim Ed the ROY or MVP in '75, but the potential impact of his outcome in that voting AND in the '75 WS would, IMHO, tip some voting scribes into his column. Hey, if Cruz had made some magic in that '86 LCS vs Mets...who knows...
We can have an entirely separate conversation about players who really shouldn't be in or be considered for the HOF but were very, very extraordinary talents (Stargell, Cepeda, Dale Evans, Gaylord Perry) but let's leave that to another thread...:)
|
| 25 | JeffG
Sustainer
ID: 40451227
Fri, Dec 13, 2002, 11:01
|
The Veterans Committee Hall of Fame ballot nominees has come out. This committee votes once every 2 years on former players and once every 4 years on non players (executives, umpires, and mangers).
All living HOF members (players, non players, broadcasters and writers) are voters.
Here are the nominees:
Players: Dick Allen, Bobby Bonds, Ken Boyer, Rocky Colavito, Wes Ferrell, Curt Flood, Joe Gordon, Gil Hodges, Elston Howard, Ted Kluszewski, Mickey Lolich, Marty Marion, Roger Maris, Mike Marshall, Carl Mays, Bob Meusel, Minnie Minoso, Thurman Munson, Don Newcombe, Tony Oliva, Vada Pinson, Allie Reynolds, Ron Santo, Joe Torre, Ken Williams, Maury Wills.
Managers, umpires and executives: Buzzie Bavasi, August Busch Jr., Harry Dalton, Charles O. Finley, Doug Harvey, Whitey Herzog, Bowie Kuhn, Walter O'Malley, Billy Martin, Marvin Miller, Gabe Paul, Paul Richards, Bill White, Dick Williams, Phil Wrigley.
|
| 26 | Whitey
Sustainer
ID: 47130129
Tue, Jan 07, 2003, 14:29
|
Murray and Carter get in
Can't really complain about those selections. I like the fact that only 2 got in. I am sure that down the road Sandberg will get in...not too sure about Rice although I think he deserves it.
|
| 27 | blue hen
Leader
ID: 40029714
Tue, Jan 07, 2003, 16:13
|
Yeah. Nothing to complain about although I have Sandberg above both.
|
| Rate this thread: | If you wish, you may rate this thread on scale of 1-5. Ratings should indicate how valuable or interesting you believe this thread would be to other users of this forum. A '5' means that this thread is a 'must read'. A '1' means that this is a complete waste of time. If you have previously rated this thread, rating it again will delete your previous rating. If you do not want to rate this thread, but want to see how others have rated it, then click the button without entering a rating, or else click here. |
|
|
|
Post a reply to this message: (But first, how about checking out this sponsor?)
|
|