Frank Thomas retiring

[mweb]

Strictly speaking as a DH, Edgar OPS'd at .959 while Thomas OPS'd at .899.

How is that relevant?

[Moose Milligan]

How is that relevant?

It's not entirely relevant, but it is interesting.

I'm not trying to say that Edgar Martinez had a better career than Frank Thomas. Thomas started at his age 22 season and by the time he made it through to his age 27 season he'd played in 789 games. 182 homers, an OPS of 1.044 and an OPS+ of 183. He had a giant head start.

As I stated before, Edgar didn't start playing full time until his age 27 season. If you read the article I linked to a little while ago, it wasn't entirely his fault...the Mariners somehow inexplicably kept playing Jim Presley in front of him.

From age 27 to age 40, Thomas OPS'd .949 and OPS+'d at 145. He hit .291.

From age 27 to age 40 Edgar OPS'd at .957, OPS+'d at 153. He hit .317.

Yes, Edgar didn't compile a ton of stats. But so what?

[mweb]

It's not entirely relevant, but it is interesting.

I'm not trying to say that Edgar Martinez had a better career than Frank Thomas. Thomas started at his age 22 season and by the time he made it through to his age 27 season he'd played in 789 games. 182 homers, an OPS of 1.044 and an OPS+ of 183. He had a giant head start.

As I stated before, Edgar didn't start playing full time until his age 27 season. If you read the article I linked to a little while ago, it wasn't entirely his fault...the Mariners somehow inexplicably kept playing Jim Presley in front of him.

From age 27 to age 40, Thomas OPS'd .949 and OPS+'d at 145. He hit .291.

From age 27 to age 40 Edgar OPS'd at .957, OPS+'d at 153. He hit .317.

Yes, Edgar didn't compile a ton of stats. But so what?

Again, I'm not saying he shouldn't make the HOF, but I am saying he wasn't as good as Frank. Even more so in terms of the criteria the writers typically use.

Even just using career OPS+, Frank beats out him out by 9. Plus he has the MVP's. And even if it wasn't entirely Edgar's fault, you have to consider how much they played. Not playing much in his early 20's likely has helped Edgar's rate stats as well, while obviously greatly hurting his counting numbers. He was also a late bloomer.

Looking at Edgar's minor league numbers, I think the earliest you can make a case for him becoming a full time player was at some point during his age 24 season. So lets give him half of that year, plus full years at age 25 and 26.

He had 280 plate appearances those years and had 66 hits and only 2 hr's. So lets give him 1,200 more PA's, and maybe he adds 300 hits and 20 hr's to his career totals.

So not that big of a change to his big counting numbers.

[Moose Milligan]

Again, I'm not saying he shouldn't make the HOF, but I am saying he wasn't as good as Frank. Even more so in terms of the criteria the writers typically use.

Even just using career OPS+, Frank beats out him out by 9. Plus he has the MVP's. And even if it wasn't entirely Edgar's fault, you have to consider how much they played. Not playing much in his early 20's likely has helped Edgar's rate stats as well, while obviously greatly hurting his counting numbers. He was also a late bloomer.

Looking at Edgar's minor league numbers, I think the earliest you can make a case for him becoming a full time player was at some point during his age 24 season. So lets give him half of that year, plus full years at age 25 and 26.

He had 280 plate appearances those years and had 66 hits and only 2 hr's. So lets give him 1,200 more PA's, and maybe he adds 300 hits and 20 hr's to his career totals.

So not that big of a change to his big counting numbers.

Good points, though you and I both know getting steady at bats in the majors does a lot for a young player. It'll be nearly impossible to tell how he could have done if they brought him up for good in 1987, his age 24 season.

But from the time he became a full time player to the end of their careers (actually Edgar played his 41 season, I didn't count that) he was every bit the hitter in a lot of categories.

I do believe the writers are holding it against him that he was a DH and a late bloomer, thus hurting the counting numbers that lazy writers look for.

Frank Thomas got off to an incredibly fast start to his career. Not included in that time frame I'm looking at are his two mvp seasons.

[mweb]

Good points, though you and I both know getting steady at bats in the majors does a lot for a young player. It'll be nearly impossible to tell how he could have done if they brought him up for good in 1987, his age 24 season.

But from the time he became a full time player to the end of their careers (actually Edgar played his 41 season, I didn't count that) he was every bit the hitter in a lot of categories.

I do believe the writers are holding it against him that he was a DH and a late bloomer, thus hurting the counting numbers that lazy writers look for.

Frank Thomas got off to an incredibly fast start to his career. Not included in that time frame I'm looking at are his two mvp seasons.

I actually gave Edgar the benefit of doubt on those extra plate appearances, basically prorated them to what he did in that age 27 season with a bit of a reduction. It's not hard to come to the conclusion that he wouldn't have hit for much power since he didn't hit 20 hr's until his age 32 season. You can add 50 hits and 10 hr's if you want though, doesn't really matter.

I really don't think it makes sense to compare what Frank and Edgar did from age 27-40. As you mention Frank got off to an incredible start before tailing off a good amount in his 30's where he was less consistent and productive. Edgar would do very well offensively against most players in that comparison as he had a very odd career path.

Well writers should hold it against a player if he brought nothing to the table with the glove. And they should hold it against a guy for being a late bloomer.

But as I said, I think they will hold the defense against Frank too, he just has the numbers to overcome that. Edgar may or may not, it's a tougher case, but he did get enough support last year to provide some hope.

[Avsfan]

GUYS...

He was in Mr. Baseball. Nuff' said...

[DrungoHazewood]

I do believe the writers are holding it against him that he was a DH and a late bloomer...

Shouldn't they? It's not like being a bad fielder and not being a regular until 27 can be spun into positives. Edgar's case for the Hall is made despite these weaknesses.

I guess you can give him some extra credit (a little, maybe a full season's worth of ABs) because the Mariners were stupid. But he's a HOFer without any extra credit.

I guess your real concern is that the writers will put him below the HOF threshold because of a short career and zero defensive value. That is possible, I suppose. With the BBWAA anything is possible.

[Moose Milligan]

Shouldn't they? It's not like being a bad fielder and not being a regular until 27 can be spun into positives. Edgar's case for the Hall is made despite these weaknesses.

I guess you can give him some extra credit (a little, maybe a full season's worth of ABs) because the Mariners were stupid. But he's a HOFer without any extra credit.

I guess your real concern is that the writers will put him below the HOF threshold because of a short career and zero defensive value. That is possible, I suppose. With the BBWAA anything is possible.

See, I don't think they should. I think they should just look at his body of work.

It wasn't in Edgar's control that they waited until he was 27 to plug him in full time. All he could control is when he got to play and the at bats he had and he did a marvelous job at that. And to me, I think that's all that should really matter.

EDIT: And I don't think he was a bad fielder...IIRC, the article I linked to earlier for espn talks about how they moved him to DH cause of a leg injury...however he was a fine fielder at 3rd base. They just...never really moved him back to the field.

[mweb]

See, I don't think they should. I think they should just look at his body of work.

It wasn't in Edgar's control that they waited until he was 27 to plug him in full time. All he could control is when he got to play and the at bats he had and he did a marvelous job at that. And to me, I think that's all that should really matter.

EDIT: And I don't think he was a bad fielder...IIRC, the article I linked to earlier for espn talks about how they moved him to DH cause of a leg injury...however he was a fine fielder at 3rd base. They just...never really moved him back to the field.

I think we are saying pretty close to the same thing here. When Drungo and I are saying they should hold it against him, I think he, and I know I am saying that means to look at his entire body of work. Those two aspects just happen to be negatives in his body of work. So you have to weight the negatives with the positives.

I do think he is partially to blame for his late start because there is no doubt he was a late bloomer in the minors. He didn't show he was worthy of much until his age 24 season. So like I said before, even if you gave him an extra 1,200 plate appearances if you want, but that wouldn't really matter in terms of the milestone stats that the voters put so much emphasis on. It's just sad that they care so much about that stuff.

[Stacey]

Joe Posnanski weighs in on Frank Thomas' Hall of Fame worthiness with a lot of focus on the steroid era and how Frank fits in. Good stuff.

http://joeposnanski.com/JoeBlog/2010/02/15/frank-thomas/

[NickM21]

It'd be cool to see Bagwell and Thomas in the same year. Given all thier similarities.

[ShaneDawg85]

The class of 2014 has the potentially to be one loaded class. Greg Maddux is as great a lock as you will ever find. Tom Glavine is a lock. Frank Thomas should be a lock.

Then you have guys like Mike Mussina and Jeff Kent who are very strong candidates and stand a good chance of one day getting in. Then there's a few guys who probably won't ever get in, but will stick around for a while, like Moises Alou, Luis Gonzalez, Jim Edmonds.

It's galaxies better than the first-ballot guys of the class of 2012. I'll say it again, but outside of Bernie Williams, who I don't think will get in, there is not one hall of famer in the group.

[DrungoHazewood]

It's galaxies better than the first-ballot guys of the class of 2012. I'll say it again, but outside of Bernie Williams, who I don't think will get in, there is not one hall of famer in the group.

It's good to have a down year now and again to force the BBWAA to reconsider their absurd positions on inner-circle, and near inner-circle guys like Raines, Trammell and Blyleven. If anybody votes for Bernie Williams over those guys they should be forced to watch ice dancing 24/7 for the next 10 years.

[Arthur_Bryant]

If anybody votes for Bernie Williams over those guys they should be forced to watch ice dancing 24/7 for the next 10 years.

Sounds like somebody has already had enough of the frou-frou.

[mweb]

It's good to have a down year now and again to force the BBWAA to reconsider their absurd positions on inner-circle, and near inner-circle guys like Raines, Trammell and Blyleven. If anybody votes for Bernie Williams over those guys they should be forced to watch ice dancing 24/7 for the next 10 years.

Don't forget Larkin.