What O's HOF (provided they were in their prime) would you add to the current roster?

[Il BuonO]

The real Cakes please step forward.

[scOtt]

<a href="http://s1106.photobucket.com/albums/h367/isestrex/Gifs/?action=view&current=seriously.gif" target="_blank"><img src="http://i1106.photobucket.com/albums/h367/isestrex/Gifs/seriously.gif" border="0" alt="Photobucket"></a>

<a href="http://s1106.photobucket.com/albums/h367/isestrex/Gifs/?action=view&current=get-out.gif" target="_blank"><img src="http://i1106.photobucket.com/albums/h367/isestrex/Gifs/get-out.gif" border="0" alt="Photobucket"></a>

LMat4prez does have a point. Cal was pretty incredible that year. I remember noticing the difference. If he didn't get the pitch he could pull and drive he'd just go to right. ALL the time. He was always on base.

It's still Frobby tho.

[skanar]

Cal is the 2nd-greatest shortstop of all time. I don't think it's nuts to try to argue that he's a better player than Frank - I don't agree, but it's not nuts. The BB-Ref player rater has Frank at #16 among hitters and Cal at #19.

That said, Cal and Brooks are not as big an improvement over Manny and JJ as any of the other three. I'm really torn, but I went with Frank. He was the best player overall, and LF is as big a hole as any on the current team. I realize this is a weird sentence to type, but I'd rather have Frank & Chris Davis than Eddie and Nate McLouth.

Also, where's the Earl Weaver option? I hear his mWAR is through the roof!

[luismatos4prez]

<a href="http://s1106.photobucket.com/albums/h367/isestrex/Gifs/?action=view&current=seriously.gif" target="_blank"><img src="http://i1106.photobucket.com/albums/h367/isestrex/Gifs/seriously.gif" border="0" alt="Photobucket"></a>

<a href="http://s1106.photobucket.com/albums/h367/isestrex/Gifs/?action=view&current=get-out.gif" target="_blank"><img src="http://i1106.photobucket.com/albums/h367/isestrex/Gifs/get-out.gif" border="0" alt="Photobucket"></a>

Haha, I figured as much. Maybe it's sentimentality since I grew up with Cal and never saw Frank play, but the evidence seems to back me up. Remember, we're talking about at their best, not overall careers.

Frank was the best hitter in the league for a while, but he didn't add that much defensively. In Cal's best years, he was not only among the best hitters in the league, but he was also playing SS at a level that makes Brendan Ryan and JJ Hardy look like amateurs. Don't forget that he was one of the best defensive SSs of all time.

When you factor in defense, I think it makes Cal an all-around better player.

Let's see what the voodoo stats say:

1991 Cal Ripken: 11.3 rWAR (11.1 fWAR)

1966 Frank Robinson: 8.6 rWAR (9.1 fWAR)

Cal's 5 best years: 42.8 rWAR (44.1 fWAR)

Frank's 5 best years: 37.6 rWAR (41.4 fWAR)

The difference in their careers ended up being Frank stayed better for longer. He was still hitting the crap out of the ball when we sent him to LA, whereas Cal was already tapering off after the Jeffery Maier year. But I really feel that Cal had the stronger prime years.

[OFFNY]

Haha, I figured as much. Maybe it's sentimentality since I grew up with Cal and never saw Frank play, but the evidence seems to back me up. Remember, we're talking about at their best, not overall careers.

Frank was the best hitter in the league for a while, but he didn't add that much defensively. In Cal's best years, he was not only among the best hitters in the league, but he was also playing SS at a level that makes Brendan Ryan and JJ Hardy look like amateurs. Don't forget that he was one of the best defensive SSs of all time.

When you factor in defense, I think it makes Cal an all-around better player.

Let's see what the voodoo stats say:

1991 Cal Ripken: 11.3 rWAR (11.1 fWAR)

1966 Frank Robinson: 8.6 rWAR (9.1 fWAR)

Cal's 5 best years: 42.8 rWAR (44.1 fWAR)

Frank's 5 best years: 37.6 rWAR (41.4 fWAR)

The difference in their careers ended up being Frank stayed better for longer. He was still hitting the crap out of the ball when we sent him to LA, whereas Cal was already tapering off after the Jeffery Maier year. But I really feel that Cal had the stronger prime years.

Actually, Robinson had an off-year when we sent him to the Dodgers after the '71 season. He battled injuries, and only had 19 HR's and 86 hits in 405 plate appearances. He did bounce back to have one final excellent season with the Angels in '73 though, as he was aided greatly by the new designated hitter rule in the American League (127 of the 144 games that Frank started that season were as the DH, plus 3 additional games in which he served as a pinch-hitter.)

[Brendan25]

Was between Eddie and Jim for me.

[crowmst3k!]

Frank Robinson, and it's not particularly close.

[Tx Oriole]

With the offseason winding down, figured it was time to post this poll.

Well I would take a young Walter Johnson in his prime. And Babe Ruth in his prime. I didn't vote nor do

any of the former O's really excite me for the team. Sorry

[waroriole]

I'll get crushed for this, but I think Cal was a better player than Frank in their primes.

Jim Palmer is a no-brainer though when you consider the team's needs. You can debate about trading certain players and moving guys to positions they've never played before, or you could just put a stud at the top of the rotation and pencil him in for dominance every 5 days.

Palmer is what the team needs.

Very few players, and no Orioles, have ever had a season like he did in '91. I'll take Cal because he's the reason I became an O's fan and I'd love to see him play again.

[Scotto]

Realistically, has to be Frank or Palmer. I think Frank added to this line up makes it formidable. Having said all that, I voted for Brooksie... God, I would love

to see him pick it again in his prime, it was just a wonder to see! Move Manny to short, trade Hardy for pitching or move him to second, and it's a

REALLY fun team to watch!

[chamdog]

Murray at 1st is a bigger need right now and they could DH Davis the difference is Eddies D Would be a huge upgrade .

[Matt]

Haha, I figured as much. Maybe it's sentimentality since I grew up with Cal and never saw Frank play, but the evidence seems to back me up. Remember, we're talking about at their best, not overall careers.

Frank was the best hitter in the league for a while, but he didn't add that much defensively. In Cal's best years, he was not only among the best hitters in the league, but he was also playing SS at a level that makes Brendan Ryan and JJ Hardy look like amateurs. Don't forget that he was one of the best defensive SSs of all time.

When you factor in defense, I think it makes Cal an all-around better player.

Let's see what the voodoo stats say:

1991 Cal Ripken: 11.3 rWAR (11.1 fWAR)

1966 Frank Robinson: 8.6 rWAR (9.1 fWAR)

Cal's 5 best years: 42.8 rWAR (44.1 fWAR)

Frank's 5 best years: 37.6 rWAR (41.4 fWAR)

I agree with your take on this.

Just wanted to give you some support!

[Frobby]

Do you really need to ask me?

Seriously, I could make a case for any of them. But Frank's prime as a hitter was very, very high, much higher than Eddie's or anyone else. He had a 198 OPS+ in his Triple Crown season and six other seasons over 160 OPS+. A MOO bat is our biggest need, and if you look up MOO in the baseball dictionary, there is Frank's picture.

[Frobby]

Haha, I figured as much. Maybe it's sentimentality since I grew up with Cal and never saw Frank play, but the evidence seems to back me up. Remember, we're talking about at their best, not overall careers.

Frank was the best hitter in the league for a while, but he didn't add that much defensively. In Cal's best years, he was not only among the best hitters in the league, but he was also playing SS at a level that makes Brendan Ryan and JJ Hardy look like amateurs. Don't forget that he was one of the best defensive SSs of all time.

When you factor in defense, I think it makes Cal an all-around better player.

Let's see what the voodoo stats say:

1991 Cal Ripken: 11.3 rWAR (11.1 fWAR)

1966 Frank Robinson: 8.6 rWAR (9.1 fWAR)

Cal's 5 best years: 42.8 rWAR (44.1 fWAR)

Frank's 5 best years: 37.6 rWAR (41.4 fWAR)

The difference in their careers ended up being Frank stayed better for longer. He was still hitting the crap out of the ball when we sent him to LA, whereas Cal was already tapering off after the Jeffery Maier year. But I really feel that Cal had the stronger prime years.

If I was starting a team from scratch, I'd take Cal in his prime over Frank in his prime. But that wasn't the question. In terms of who I'd add to this team, I'd add Frank. Cal over Hardy on defense isn't a big upgrade.

[TonySoprano]

If I was starting a team from scratch, I'd take Cal in his prime over Frank in his prime. But that wasn't the question. In terms of who I'd add to this team, I'd add Frank. Cal over Hardy on defense isn't a big upgrade.

Are you saying Frank over Markakis is a big upgrade on defense?