Ok... Who SHOULD be in?

[DrungoHazewood]

 

9 hours ago, Satyr3206 said:

Anyone that used should not be in. Just like the recent cheaters.

Including Aaron and Mays, who almost certainly used greenies?

6 hours ago, Maverick Hiker said:

Two who should not be in: Bonds and Clemens: Never.  Their statistics are inflated due to steroids and letting cheaters in is not a good message. Manny Ramirez too. 

There are too many players in the Hall who don't deserve to be there based on their accomplishments.  Standards have been lowered in certain cases. . Gary Carter for example.  I'd consider Schilling and Fred Lynn but I'd have to look at their lifetime stats first.

Rivera should not have been the first unanimous choice when so many other great players were not unanimous.  Babe Ruth, Ty Cobb, Frank Robinson, they were far more valuable than a closer.  Also Rivera blew. a couple of post seasons series for the Yankees.  By the same token I'm glad Jeter was not unanimous and I give credit to the writer who kept that from happening. 

Gary Carter is one of the half-dozen best catchers of all time, or at least has a strong case for that kind of ranking.  If he's not in it's basically Bench and... nobody?

The unanimous thing is a result of a poorly thought out voting process.  In the very early days hundreds of now-enshrined players were eligible, there were no good sources of information, and the voting was the same - you had to get 75% to get in.  And there was a badly thought out split between 19th and 20th century players.  It's no surprise that no one got 100% of the vote.  Cy Young didn't even get in the Hall in the first class because nobody knew if he was treated as a 19th century or 20th century guy.  

They basically went to hundreds of writers and asked them to go by memory and vote for up to 10 out 1000s of plausible candidates.  It's amazing anyone got 75%, 100% is ludicrous.

In the 1940s or early 50s. Lefty Grove got votes after he'd already been elected.  Di Maggio got a few votes when he was still active, before he was eligible.  It was a complete crapshow, and continues to be to some extent today.

3 hours ago, waroriole said:

Yeah Baines is one of the most egregious choices I can recall. 

And yet there are a number of players with lesser careers who've been enshrined.  Tommy McCarthy.  Ray Schalk.  Bill Mazeroski.  High Pockets Kelly.

18 minutes ago, sakata_catching said:

Grich and Lou Whitaker aren't just borderline cases — they're both well above the threshold for 2b.

Dewey Evans should've gone in instead of teammate Jim Rice. 

Dick Allen is more of a borderline case — shy on traditional counting stat milestones and brutal on defense but still managing to put up 156 OPS+ and 58.7 career WAR over a 14 year career. If he hadn't been hung with a 'clubhouse cancer' tag, he'd probably get more love.

You can certainly make the case that Whitaker and Grich are right around the level of an average Hall of Fame second baseman.  Grich and Ryne Sandberg are very similar.  Whitaker's career is about as valuable as Roberto Alomar.  Both of them are difficult to exclude when compared to 6, 8, 10 obviously lesser second basemen who have long been in.

Evans is a victim of having an underappreciated skill set in his era.  Players who do a lot of things pretty well never get the credit someone like Rice gets for hitting a lot of homers at a very homer-friendly park.

Allen would have a better case if he'd been able to control his alcoholism and destructive personality.  I know he faced a lot of societal pressures including racism, but it's not helpful when you openly agitate and conspire to have your manager fired on multiple occasions.  He was a truly fearsome hitter, much better than Jim Rice.

[Moose Milligan]

The same people who voted for Bonds and Clemens to win MVPs and Cy Youngs are the same to vote and keep them out of the hall.  It's pretty two faced, if you ask me.

 

 

[Babypowder]

On the current ballot or all time? From the current ballot I'd be putting in Bonds, Clemens, Schilling, Rolen, and Ramirez. All of whom have an above HOF position average JAWS.

[HowAboutThat]

A lot of the arguments mentioned during Hall of Fame discussions are as moot as using the pilgrims and the Mayflower as an example of illegal immigration.

The “greenies” Argument is one such. Illegal or not, they were commonly used and it was tolerated. That cannot remotely be compared with The steroid situation. 

And everybody, and I mean everybody,  ignores the character clause. We can all think of current players who demonstrate a lack of character by their actions.

Raffy was one of my very favorite players, but I wouldn’t vote for him if my life depended on it. Bonds as well. Altuve won’t get my vote, nor Verlander or Cole, at least not at this point. 

Ridiculing people who invoke the character clause is a very big part of the problem. It exists so that Voters will be encouraged to look at the quality of the person as well as the quality of the ball player.

[Bahama O's Fan]

Pete Rose

[Maverick Hiker]

Gary Carter was a lifetime .262 batter who hit into a lot of double plays (very slow afoot).  324 HR over 19 years equals 17 per year.  He was pretty good defensively but only won the gold glove 3 years out of 19 so other catchers were presumably better.   I just don't think he was Hall of Fame material.    He was rejected the first time and broke down weeping so some of his being elected the next year was probably a sympathy vote. 

It's a shame Gary  passed away at a relatively young age and he was a good teammate from everything I've heard.  But the Hall should be reserved for great players not very good ones. 

Great catcher, Hall of Fame Material: Johnny Bench.  10 gold gloves.  Averaged 23 HR per year.  And a rocket for an arm I still recall him throwing out Lou Brock in 1974 when Brock set the stolen base record.

[makoman]

12 minutes ago, Maverick Hiker said:

Gary Carter was a lifetime .262 batter who hit into a lot of double plays (very slow afoot).  324 HR over 19 years equals 17 per year.  He was pretty good defensively but only won the gold glove 3 years out of 19 so other catchers were presumably better.   I just don't think he was Hall of Fame material.    He was rejected the first time and broke down weeping so some of his being elected the next year was probably a sympathy vote. 

It's a shame Gary  passed away at a relatively young age and he was a good teammate from everything I've heard.  But the Hall should be reserved for great players not very good ones. 

Great catcher, Hall of Fame Material: Johnny Bench.  10 gold gloves.  Averaged 23 HR per year.  And a rocket for an arm I still recall him throwing out Lou Brock in 1974 when Brock set the stolen base record.

Cal was just a .276 batter who grounded into almost twice as many DPs as Carter and only averaged 20 HR per year. Also only two gold gloves. If those are the things that are important to you. Lower OPS+ than Carter too. 

Johnny Bench is often considered to be the best catcher of all time, so if that's the standard you're going to have a small hall. He also grounded into more double plays than Carter in fewer plate appearances. If you go by WAR, which it appears you wouldn't, Bench is first and Carter is second.

[sportsfan8703]

2 hours ago, Bahama O's Fan said:

Pete Rose

At this point they should.  I'm sure lots of players are playing fanduel in their own sports at the very least.  

[Frobby]

2 hours ago, Philip said:

Altuve won’t get my vote, nor Verlander or Cole, at least not at this point.

I’d look at Altuve, whose stats may have benefitted from the sign-stealing scheme, differently than Verlander and Cole, who got no direct benefit.   I suppose they benefited indirectly from having more runs scored in their support when they pitched.  But I don’t really see that it was on them to do something about it.   

[Frobby]

2 minutes ago, sportsfan8703 said:

At this point they should.  I'm sure lots of players are playing fanduel in their own sports at the very least.  

They’d be incredibly stupid to take that risk.   

[ShaneDawg85]

Scott Rolen has jumped from 10% to 35% in three voting cycles, I'm curious how he isn't getting more support.  10th highest WAR all time among 3rd basemen, 8 Gold Gloves, got both the counting states and the advanced stats.  I can't remember if the guy was just a nothing or jerk personality, aside from Philly fans being Philly fans because he wasn't the second coming of Mike Schmidt and tiffs with Tony LaRussa because who didn't have a tiff with Tony LaRussa.  In some ways he's a contemporary Craig Nettles, coincidentally two spots behind Rolen on the career WAR list if you don't count Edgar Martinez as a 3rd baseman.  Similar career numbers, lauded for the glove, but overshadowed by someone else.  Nettles played in the era with Brooks and Mike Schmidt, Rolen played in the era of Chipper Jones, Adrian Beltre, and ARod.  

[LookinUp]

Anyone know if a modern SABR type person has written about the best non-hall inductees? That would be an interesting read and would likely resuscitate the case for a few guys like Grich and Whitaker.

[Can_of_corn]

3 minutes ago, LookinUp said:

Anyone know if a modern SABR type person has written about the best non-hall inductees? That would be an interesting read and would likely resuscitate the case for a few guys like Grich and Whitaker.

I don't think a SABR type is going to impact a veteran's committee is a positive way.

I honestly think they are picking guys to piss off the analytical baseball guys.

[Maverick Hiker]

5 hours ago, makoman said:

Cal was just a .276 batter who grounded into almost twice as many DPs as Carter and only averaged 20 HR per year. Also only two gold gloves. If those are the things that are important to you. Lower OPS+ than Carter too. 

Johnny Bench is often considered to be the best catcher of all time, so if that's the standard you're going to have a small hall. He also grounded into more double plays than Carter in fewer plate appearances. If you go by WAR, which it appears you wouldn't, Bench is first and Carter is second.

If you look at the careers of various catchers there  is no way Gary Carter is #2 behind Bench . Carter is far down the list, there are numerous catchers who were far better, even though they are slightly behind him in WAR (which is an inexact and misleading statistic at times.).  Gabby Hartnett had a .297 lifetime BA.  Yogi Berra had 358 HR and a lifetime .285 BA.  Bill Dickey had a .313 lifetime average, Mickey Cochrane .320.  

In modern times Mike Piazza (.308) and Ivan Rodriguez (.296 BA 311 HR) were far better than Carter.

I don't want to single anyone out but it always bothered me that the Hall has lowered their standards and that Carter made the Hall of Fame.  Admittedly I never cared for the Mets or Carter while he played,, but there are so many great catchers who were far better than Carter.    The fact that Carter was first rejected from the Hall  before he later got in indicates he was a marginal candidate., 

 

[Can_of_corn]

12 minutes ago, Maverick Hiker said:

If you look at the careers of various catchers there  is no way Gary Carter is #2 behind Bench . Carter is far down the list, there are numerous catchers who were far better, even though they are slightly behind him in WAR (which is an inexact and misleading statistic at times.).  Gabby Hartnett had a .297 lifetime BA.  Yogi Berra had 358 HR and a lifetime .285 BA.  Bill Dickey had a .313 lifetime average, Mickey Cochrane .320.  

In modern times Mike Piazza (.308) and Ivan Rodriguez (.296 BA 311 HR) were far better than Carter.

I don't want to single anyone out but it always bothered me that the Hall has lowered their standards and that Carter made the Hall of Fame.  Admittedly I never cared for the Mets or Carter while he played,, but there are so many great catchers who were far better than Carter.    The fact that Carter was first rejected from the Hall  before he later got in indicates he was a marginal candidate., 

 

You sure are a fan of batting average. 

Do you think that's the best way to judge a position player's worth?

BTW, you missed Ernie Lombardi (306).