Harold Baines.....Lee Smith in Hall of Fame

[Hallas]

1 hour ago, DrungoHazewood said:

I guess you could make the case than Hoffman is one of the 2-3 best closers (non-Rivera category) in modern baseball.  Baines is something like the 8th-best full time DH.  So one you get past the "should we be electing the 8th best closer/DH at all" hangup he might be more Reardon than Hoffman.

 

Who are better full time DH's?  I can think of Martinez, Ortiz, and Frank Thomas.  After that the list is pretty thin.  I did a search for players that spent at least 45% of their career games at DH, and the top few names in descending order of WAR is Thomas, Martinez, Ortiz, Baines, Chili Davis, Don Baylor, Hal McRae, and Travis Hafner.  Baines and Chili Davis are pretty good comps, but no one's clamoring for Davis's HOF induction.  After that it's Don Baylor, who's 10 WAR below Baines/Davis, and definitely not HOF material.  The gap between the top 3 and Baines/Davis is pretty big, both subjectively in my head and based on the stats.

Apparently the ability to be a top-tier hitter for 15-20 years while simultaneously being such a bad fielder that you never do it is a really rare skillset.

[DrungoHazewood]

18 hours ago, Hallas said:

 

Who are better full time DH's?  I can think of Martinez, Ortiz, and Frank Thomas.  After that the list is pretty thin.  I did a search for players that spent at least 45% of their career games at DH, and the top few names in descending order of WAR is Thomas, Martinez, Ortiz, Baines, Chili Davis, Don Baylor, Hal McRae, and Travis Hafner.  Baines and Chili Davis are pretty good comps, but no one's clamoring for Davis's HOF induction.  After that it's Don Baylor, who's 10 WAR below Baines/Davis, and definitely not HOF material.  The gap between the top 3 and Baines/Davis is pretty big, both subjectively in my head and based on the stats.

Apparently the ability to be a top-tier hitter for 15-20 years while simultaneously being such a bad fielder that you never do it is a really rare skillset.

Players with 1000 games at DH are: Baines, Molitor, Chili Davis, Ortiz, Thomas, Baylor, McRae, Martinez, Hafner.  

I agree that being a very good hitter while also being a terrible fielder is an unusual combination.  It is harder to hit when you're DHing.  But I'm not sure it's all that valuable.  If it was valuable teams would pay players more to do it.  They'd tell players "I know you'd like to play RF, but we need you to DH and we'll pay you an extra $3M a year to not play defense."  But they don't.  They rotate people through the position, they use it to rest guys, they platoon the 4th OFer and the backup 1B/3B.  

With appropriate motivation there are 30-50 players who could DH and post a 125 OPS+ in any given year.  But most of them have a decent glove and are more valuable to their teams in the field.  Mike Trout would be the best DH in history by 1000 miles, but that would be a terrible use of resources. That's using a Fortune 500 CEO to negotiate your company's fire insurance plan.

[Moose Milligan]

21 hours ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Maybe the Las Vegas Gaming Association Hall of Fame.  Or the athletes wing of the Organized Crime Hall of Fame.

The first lifetime bans for gambling were associated with the 1877 Louisville scandal.  It's not like they didn't know the consequences, this was nothing new.  Everyone knew.

Three more quick points since I didn't have enough time yesterday:

First, the Baseball Hall of Fame is a museum.  It tells the history of the game.

You can't tell the history of baseball without including Pete Rose.  You can't tell the history of baseball without including Shoeless Joe Jackson and the Black Sox.  What, you can have a Pete Rose exhibit, have his jerseys, hats, bats, pictures...but you draw the line at having a little plaque in a room with other little plaques and letting him have a weekend where he makes a 5 minute speech?  You draw the line there?  

Second, in the HoF are racists that upheld the color line, not allowing great players to play the game for generations...we lost out on guys like Josh Gibson, Cool Papa Bell, prime Satchel Paige, countless others and the guys that played a part in keeping them out are in the Hall....those guys are in?  I'm not trying to play the moral equivalency game, but I am playing the moral equivalency game.  Keeping out a whole race of people from playing the game isn't as bad as betting on a few Reds games?  What about the owners that colluded in the mid 80s to keep player salaries down, thus intentionally not building their teams to the best of their abilities?  Those guys are in the HoF?  Campaigns for known PED users? (Bonds and Clemens should be in, IMO) The game has never been on the up and up, are we going to keep pretending like it has been?

If the whole pearl clutching about Pete Rose is all about "the sanctity of the game" and the whole romantic cliches about fathers and sons and the purity of baseball, the National pastime and all that crap, it's completely disingenuous.  There's a whole seedy underbelly of this game (and life) that can't be ignored.  Big deal if Pete Rose gambled, it completely pales in comparison to everything else.

Third, what's considered gambling?  If Trumbo and Davis are sitting in the dugout and Trumbo goes "Hey Chris, I bet you a steak dinner you can't get a hit off this guy," isn't that gambling?  What if Trumbo goes "I bet you 5 bucks you can't get a hit off this guy," is that gambling?  10 bucks?  50?  Do I hear 1,000? Game checks?  Where does it become "gambling" and "lifetime ineligibility"?  If guys are in the dugouts making bets, isn't that messing with the sanctity of the game?  Or do we only start the pearl clutching with phonecalls to Vegas, gambling sheets, and shady mafia characters?   

[weams]

23 hours ago, Moose Milligan said:

And should be in the HoF with Pete Rose.  Fight me.

O.J. is in Canton.

[weams]

Just now, weams said:

O.J. is in Canton.

This is his plaque

Quote

(SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA)...6'1'', 212...ORENTHAL JAMES SIMPSON. . .HEISMAN TROPHY WINNER, 1968. . .NO. 1 NFL DRAFT PICK, 1969. . .CAREER HIGHLIGHTED BY 2,003 YARDS RUSHING, 1973. . . UNANIMOUS ALL-PRO, TOPPED 1,000 YARDS RUSHING, 1972-1976. . .WON FOUR NFL RUSHING TITLES. . . CAREER RECORD: 11,236 YARDS RUSHING, 203 RECEPTIONS, 990 YARDS KICKOFF RETURNS, 14,368 COMBINED NET YARDS. . .IN 1969 AFL ALL-STAR GAME, FIVE PRO BOWLS. . .1973 PRO BOWL PLAYER OF THE GAME. . . BORN JULY 9, 1947, IN SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA.

 

[Moose Milligan]

Just now, weams said:

O.J. is in Canton.

Before he murdered Nicole and Ron.  But no one's kicking him out! 

[weams]

Just now, weams said:

This is his plaque

 

His full Canton write up.

Quote

•  
• CAREER CAPSULE
•  
• ENSHRINEMENT SPEECH
•  
• MEDIA
•  
• MERCHANDISE

O.J. SIMPSONCAREER HIGHLIGHTS

Previous

14,368

COMBINED NET YARDS

11

SEASONS

11,236

RUSHING YARDS

4

RUSHING TITLES

5

ALL-PRO SELECTIONS

14,368

COMBINED NET YARDS

11

SEASONS

Next

VIEW FULL STATS

"IF YOU’RE GOING TO BE A SUPERSTAR, IN SPORTS OR ANYTHING ELSE, IT’S YOUR MIND—NOT YOUR BODY—THAT’LL GET YOU THERE…IT’S CONCENTRATION, THE ABILITY TO BLOT OUT EVERYTHING THAT DOESN’T HELP YOU DO YOUR BEST.”

READ O.J. SIMPSON'S BIO

CLASS OF 1985ENSHRINEMENT SPEECH

 

(SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA)...6'1'', 212...ORENTHAL JAMES SIMPSON. . .HEISMAN TROPHY WINNER, 1968. . .NO. 1 NFL DRAFT PICK, 1969. . .CAREER HIGHLIGHTED BY 2,003 YARDS RUSHING, 1973. . . UNANIMOUS ALL-PRO, TOPPED 1,000 YARDS RUSHING, 1972-1976. . .WON FOUR NFL RUSHING TITLES. . . CAREER RECORD: 11,236 YARDS RUSHING, 203 RECEPTIONS, 990 YARDS KICKOFF RETURNS, 14,368 COMBINED NET YARDS. . .IN 1969 AFL ALL-STAR GAME, FIVE PRO BOWLS. . .1973 PRO BOWL PLAYER OF THE ME. . . BORN JULY 9, 1947, IN SAN FRANCISCO, 

O.J. SIMPSON BUFFALO BILLS & SAN FRANCISCO 49ERS

"If you’re going to be a superstar, in sports or anything else, it’s your mind—not your body—that’ll get you there…it’s concentration, the ability to blot out everything that doesn’t help you do your best.”

O. J. Simpson, a two-time All-America from the University of Southern California and the 1968 Heisman Trophy winner, was one of history's most heralded rookies when the Buffalo Bills selected him as the No. 1 player in the entire 1969 draft.

His career record for 11 seasons, the first nine in Buffalo and the 1978 and 1979 campaigns in San Francisco, confirms the rave notices were well founded. He rushed for 11,236 yards, added 2,142 yards on 203 pass receptions, returned 33 kickoffs 990 yards for a superb 30-yard average, and amassed 14,368 combined net yards. He scored 456 points on 76 touchdowns.

O. J. was not an immediate success and, in fact, did not even win Rookie of the Year acclaim in 1969. Incredibly, he was used sparingly as a running back through his first three campaigns until Lou Saban took over the reins in 1972 and immediately decided to give the 6-1, 212-pound speedster the football as often as possible.

Simpson immediately responded with massive ground-gaining performances. O.J. may be best remembered for his sensational 1973 season when he became the first back in history to rush for over 2,000 yards. With 219 yards in the next-to-last game against New England and a 200-yard output in the finale with the New York Jets, Simpson totaled 2,003 yards, tops for a 14-game season.

Many say the 1975 season was even better - 1,817 yards rushing, 426 yards on receptions and a then-record 23 touchdowns. O.J. led the league in rushing four years in 1972, 1973, 1975 and 1976.

In various selections, he was named NFL Player of the Year in 1972, 1973 and 1975. He was both All-AFC and All-Pro five straight years from 1972 through 1976. He played in six Pro Bowls, winning Player of the Game honors in the 1973 game.

 

[weams]

1 minute ago, Moose Milligan said:

Before he murdered Nicole and Ron.  But no one's kicking him out! 

Sure, no one is voting him in after he cuts off a head. 

[DrungoHazewood]

8 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

Three more quick points since I didn't have enough time yesterday:

First, the Baseball Hall of Fame is a museum.  It tells the history of the game.

You can't tell the history of baseball without including Pete Rose.  You can't tell the history of baseball without including Shoeless Joe Jackson and the Black Sox.  What, you can have a Pete Rose exhibit, have his jerseys, hats, bats, pictures...but you draw the line at having a little plaque in a room with other little plaques and letting him have a weekend where he makes a 5 minute speech?  You draw the line there?  

Second, in the HoF are racists that upheld the color line, not allowing great players to play the game for generations...we lost out on guys like Josh Gibson, Cool Papa Bell, prime Satchel Paige, countless others and the guys that played a part in keeping them out are in the Hall....those guys are in?  I'm not trying to play the moral equivalency game, but I am playing the moral equivalency game.  Keeping out a whole race of people from playing the game isn't as bad as betting on a few Reds games?  What about the owners that colluded in the mid 80s to keep player salaries down, thus intentionally not building their teams to the best of their abilities?  Those guys are in the HoF?  Campaigns for known PED users (Bonds and Clemens should be in, IMO) The game has never been on the up and up, are we going to keep pretending like it has been?

If the whole pearl clutching about Pete Rose is all about "the sanctity of the game" and the whole romantic cliches about fathers and sons and the purity of baseball, the National pastime and all that crap, it's completely disingenuous.  There's a whole seedy underbelly of this game (and life) that can't be ignored.  Big deal if Pete Rose gambled, it completely pales in comparison to everything else.

Third, what's considered gambling?  If Trumbo and Davis are sitting in the dugout and Trumbo goes "Hey Chris, I bet you a steak dinner you can't get a hit off this guy," isn't that gambling?  What if Trumbo goes "I bet you 5 bucks you can't get a hit off this guy," is that gambling?  10 bucks?  50?  Do I hear 1,000? Game checks?  Where does it become "gambling" and "lifetime ineligibility"?  If guys are in the dugouts making bets, isn't that messing with the sanctity of the game?  Or do we only start the pearl clutching with phonecalls to Vegas, gambling sheets, and shady mafia characters?   

Yes, I draw the line there.  Gibson, Bell, Paige are all in the Hall, they have their plaques.  We can't go back and time and let them play in the majors.

All of that gambling is illegal in baseball.  I think it has to be.  Obviously nobody is going to make a huge case about an offhand comment about a $5 bet.  But gambling should be taken seriously because it really does have the ability to transform a sport into a kind of joke.  If many or most people think the players are on the take it can destroy it all.  For much of the 19th and 20th centuries baseball's biggest competition was boxing.  Boxing is now kind of a sideshow.  Some of that is the whole scrambled brains thing but a lot of it is that by the 1990s people assumed a lot of matches were fixed.  I'd much rather not be having that discussion about baseball.  

Just because bad things have happened and continue to happen doesn't mean we should allow or encourage bad things.  And we certainly don't need to bestow high honors on people who knowingly broke the most important rules.  There was never a sign in the clubhouse that said "take 'roids and you're banned for life."  But there was a commish and a bunch of owners who said "keep on hitting them homers, boys, we know you're clean! (wink wink)"

[DrungoHazewood]

9 minutes ago, weams said:

O.J. is in Canton.

Maybe I'm crazy, but I don't think baseball's best path is to imitate the NFL.  I think one of baseball's selling points is being the anti-NFL.

[weams]

Just now, DrungoHazewood said:

Maybe I'm crazy, but I don't think baseball's best path is to imitate the NFL.  I think one of baseball's selling points is being the anti-NFL.

Yes.

[DrungoHazewood]

11 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

Before he murdered Nicole and Ron.  But no one's kicking him out! 

Has anyone ever been kicked out of a major sports HOF?

[Number5]

16 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

Three more quick points since I didn't have enough time yesterday:

First, the Baseball Hall of Fame is a museum.  It tells the history of the game.

You can't tell the history of baseball without including Pete Rose.  You can't tell the history of baseball without including Shoeless Joe Jackson and the Black Sox.  What, you can have a Pete Rose exhibit, have his jerseys, hats, bats, pictures...but you draw the line at having a little plaque in a room with other little plaques and letting him have a weekend where he makes a 5 minute speech?  You draw the line there?  

Second, in the HoF are racists that upheld the color line, not allowing great players to play the game for generations...we lost out on guys like Josh Gibson, Cool Papa Bell, prime Satchel Paige, countless others and the guys that played a part in keeping them out are in the Hall....those guys are in?  I'm not trying to play the moral equivalency game, but I am playing the moral equivalency game.  Keeping out a whole race of people from playing the game isn't as bad as betting on a few Reds games?  What about the owners that colluded in the mid 80s to keep player salaries down, thus intentionally not building their teams to the best of their abilities?  Those guys are in the HoF?  Campaigns for known PED users? (Bonds and Clemens should be in, IMO) The game has never been on the up and up, are we going to keep pretending like it has been?

If the whole pearl clutching about Pete Rose is all about "the sanctity of the game" and the whole romantic cliches about fathers and sons and the purity of baseball, the National pastime and all that crap, it's completely disingenuous.  There's a whole seedy underbelly of this game (and life) that can't be ignored.  Big deal if Pete Rose gambled, it completely pales in comparison to everything else.

Third, what's considered gambling?  If Trumbo and Davis are sitting in the dugout and Trumbo goes "Hey Chris, I bet you a steak dinner you can't get a hit off this guy," isn't that gambling?  What if Trumbo goes "I bet you 5 bucks you can't get a hit off this guy," is that gambling?  10 bucks?  50?  Do I hear 1,000? Game checks?  Where does it become "gambling" and "lifetime ineligibility"?  If guys are in the dugouts making bets, isn't that messing with the sanctity of the game?  Or do we only start the pearl clutching with phonecalls to Vegas, gambling sheets, and shady mafia characters?   

Hard to justify banning players for life for gambling while secretly giving umpires a slap on the wrist for doing so.  Far worse for an umpire to owe money to bookies than a player, IMO.  Who knows, keeping an umpire known to owe bookies on the job could even result in the ump becoming a right field umpire in a playoff game and pretending not to see a fan reach onto the field and interfere on a game-changing play.  That could never happen, right?

[DrungoHazewood]

3 minutes ago, Number5 said:

Hard to justify banning players for life for gambling while secretly giving umpires a slap on the wrist for doing so.  Far worse for an umpire to owe money to bookies than a player, IMO.  Who knows, keeping an umpire known to owe bookies on the job could even result in the ump becoming a right field umpire in a playoff game and pretending not to see a fan reach onto the field and interfere on a game-changing play.  That could never happen, right?

The solution is to very publicly ban the umpire for life (like they did for Dick Higham). Not induct Pete Rose in the Hall.

[Number5]

3 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

The solution is to very publicly ban the umpire for life (like they did for Dick Higham). Not induct Pete Rose in the Hall.

But they didn't ban Garcia for life.  In fact, they later promoted him to umpiring supervisor.  Had they fired him, as they clearly should, the Orioles win  that game and perhaps the series.