Congratulations, Moose!

[TonySoprano]

25 minutes ago, Dipper9 said:

Sorry, but this post just irritates me.  Sometimes we need to put our Oriole fandom on hold, and just respect the sport of baseball.  Mariano was a no doubt about it 100% Hall of Famer.  Being snarky about it is uncalled for.  

Sure he was, but so was Griffey, Ripken, Seaver...

It wasn't because he was a Yankee but because it was long overdue. What I can't stand is the BBWAA tripping over itself in sheer delight that, for one year and one player, they decided to put aside their own stupid games they've played with the ballot for 80+ years.    Next year it will be Captain O-ver-rated and the crescendo of the self congratulating back slapping will grow even louder.

[Babypowder]

7 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

I think that if you are qualified to get into the hall via the voters you are qualified to go in at 100%.

Agreed, but I don't think any relievers are slam dunks, even Mo. I personally probably wouldn't have voted for him. Sub-60 rWAR, sub 40 fWAR. There are many more valuable (better) players that I also wouldn't vote for.

[ShaneDawg85]

2 minutes ago, TonySoprano said:

Sure he was, but so was Griffey, Ripken, Seaver...

It wasn't because he was a Yankee but because it was long overdue. What I can't stand is the BBWAA tripping over itself in sheer delight that, for one year and one player, they decided to put aside their own stupid games they've played with the ballot for 80+ years.    Next year it will be Captain O-ver-rated and the crescendo of the self congratulating back slapping will grow even louder.

I'd honestly fall over laughing if next year Jeter doesn't get 100%, because no all of a sudden somebody did get it and it's like a reverse protest where the writers don't want to disrespect Mariano by having someone else get to 100%.

[atomic]

10 minutes ago, Babypowder said:

Agreed, but I don't think any relievers are slam dunks, even Mo. I personally probably wouldn't have voted for him. Sub-60 rWAR, sub 40 fWAR. There are many more valuable (better) players that I also wouldn't vote for.

Well maybe sometime you need to stop looking at WAR all the time.  IF all you are looking at is WAR you could replace the HOF vote with a computer.  Obviously WAR undervalues closers.  Like it overvalues guys like Chris Davis. It isn't a perfect stat and it should be used as such.  And fanagraphs WAR for pitchers is completely useless. 

[Babypowder]

13 minutes ago, Dipper9 said:

Mo made every Yankee game an 8 inning game.  If they had the lead after 8 it was over.  I would take Mo 30 times over Andy P.  

I'll take the guy who threw 2000 more innings, around 30 more fWAR, 5 more rWAR and higher JAWS.

[atomic]

7 minutes ago, Babypowder said:

 I'll take the guy who threw 2000 more innings, around 30 more fWAR, and 5 more rWAR and higher JAWS.

Like I said FWar is a worthless stat.  But if that is all you bring to the table in evaluating players why even post we can all google the information you are providing.  

[wildbillhiccup]

So my question is why is Jeter so deserving of a unanimous vote? He was below average defensively and his offensive numbers and essentially a 20/20 good batting average guy over the course of career. If I'm going by the numbers I'd say he falls somewhere between Larkin/Yount and Ripken (probably closer to Larkin/Yount) in terms of recent SS that have been inducted. I mean I'd vote for him, but if we didn't expect Ripken to be a unanimous vote then I don't why we should expect Jeter to be one. What am I missing? 

[DrungoHazewood]

22 minutes ago, Babypowder said:

Agreed, but I don't think any relievers are slam dunks, even Mo. I personally probably wouldn't have voted for him. Sub-60 rWAR, sub 40 fWAR. There are many more valuable (better) players that I also wouldn't vote for.

I agree that relievers in general are overrated and the aren't hugely valuable because they only pitch 60-80 innings a year. But when you totally lap the field in your niche maybe that deserves some respect.  Since 1980 the leaders in relief rWAR are Rivera at 57, then Lee Smith at 29.  While maybe not as impactful, that's kind of like the all time HR leaders list when Ruth retired.

Pitchers Rivera out-rWAR's include: Whitey Ford, Sandy Koufax, Hoyt Wilhelm, Burleigh Grimes, Jack Morris, Dizzy Dean, Addie Joss, Jack Chesbro, Catfish, and at least a half-dozen more HOF starters.

[wildbillhiccup]

11 minutes ago, Babypowder said:

I'll take the guy who threw 2000 more innings, around 30 more fWAR, 5 more rWAR and higher JAWS.

Quantity never equals quality and regardless of numbers I don't think Petitte passes the eye test. He's not a HOFer. 

[DrungoHazewood]

15 minutes ago, atomic said:

Obviously WAR undervalues closers.

So make your case that it undervalues closers.  Be sure to let us know which flavor you're using.  Please use actual analysis and facts, not just that you "know" it undervalues closers.  We're simple people with modest IQs, we need the evidence presented in a clear and concise way.  

[foxfield]

1 minute ago, wildbillhiccup said:

So my question is why is Jeter so deserving of a unanimous vote? He was below average defensively and his offensive numbers and essentially a 20/20 good batting average guy over the course of career. If I'm going by the numbers I'd say he falls somewhere between Larkin/Yount and Ripken (probably closer to Larkin/Yount) in terms of recent SS that have been inducted. I mean I'd vote for him, but if we didn't expect Ripken to be a unanimous vote then I don't why we should expect Jeter to be one. What am I missing? 

What you are missing is that Jeter is a sure HOF as was Cal.  The difference is when Cal went in, the unanimous bias existed.  For Mo Rivera, obviously it did not.  Jeter, presumably will have the same expectation, but remember, these HOF voters are predictably unpredictable.  Cal, Seaver, Griffey are all better players in my opinion than Jeter.  However, the intangible factor for Jeter and his overrated defensive skills, along with his rings and his pinstripes...well he is a certain first ballot HOF.  

The question really isn't why should he be unanimous, but rather, why would YOU as a voter not vote for him?

Because, isn't a reason.  That is the best thing that comes from the Rivera vote.  It removes because as a reason.

[DrungoHazewood]

5 minutes ago, wildbillhiccup said:

So my question is why is Jeter so deserving of a unanimous vote? He was below average defensively and his offensive numbers and essentially a 20/20 good batting average guy over the course of career. If I'm going by the numbers I'd say he falls somewhere between Larkin/Yount and Ripken (probably closer to Larkin/Yount) in terms of recent SS that have been inducted. I mean I'd vote for him, but if we didn't expect Ripken to be a unanimous vote then I don't why we should expect Jeter to be one. What am I missing? 

I think everyone who is well above the average HOFer is deserving of a unanimous vote.  Excepeting cases where there are more than 10 above-average HOFers on the ballot at once.  Jeter is clearly above the average HOFer.  As much as I can't stand him, his career was about equal to double Harold Baines'.

[Number5]

1 minute ago, wildbillhiccup said:

Quantity never equals quality and regardless of numbers I don't think Petitte passes the eye test. He's not a HOFer. 

Actually, quantity has proven to be a very important consideration in HOF voting.  A guy like Dale Murphy definitely had some high-quality seasons, but didn't put up the quantity needed to be HOF-worthy.

[El Gordo]

Nobody doesn't like Mo. Sorry Cal.

[Ohfan67]

5 minutes ago, foxfield said:

What you are missing is that Jeter is a sure HOF as was Cal.  The difference is when Cal went in, the unanimous bias existed.  For Mo Rivera, obviously it did not.  Jeter, presumably will have the same expectation, but remember, these HOF voters are predictably unpredictable.  Cal, Seaver, Griffey are all better players in my opinion than Jeter.  However, the intangible factor for Jeter and his overrated defensive skills, along with his rings and his pinstripes...well he is a certain first ballot HOF.  

The question really isn't why should he be unanimous, but rather, why would YOU as a voter not vote for him?

Because, isn't a reason.  That is the best thing that comes from the Rivera vote.  It removes because as a reason.

I could care less about the fake hype regarding unanimous or not. It's all B.S. noise IMO. That aside, I don't think Jeter will be a unanimous HOF'er. There are some baseball writer types that ragged Jeter's defense pretty hard during his career and that thought his persona was fake. He will get some "no" votes.  Meaningless no votes, but some.