Rocky Colavito: Stick it up their ***

[Peter_Spaeth]

Agreed on Colavito. I mean I am sure you could find a few guys or even more who are in but deserved it less, but that can't be the yardstick. Very good player, but a clear step below the Hall IMO.

[clydepepper]

Damn Right, Rocco!!!

[RTK]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Agreed on Colavito. I mean I am sure you could find a few guys or even more who are in but deserved it less, but that can't be the yardstick. Very good player, but a clear step below the Hall IMO.

I agree, it also opens the door wider to quite a few other marginal players who had truly good careers but not HOF worthy. It could lead to quite an influx of members. Something telling to me is the drop off in stats. It's unfortunate when injuries happen to what could be great players but that's life, it's bound to happen in sports. Another player I can think of in the same category as Colavito, is Bill Buckner..2800 some hits irc.

[nat]

There are lots of players who had great careers that are still short on qualifications for the hall of fame. OTOMH: Tony Oliva, Dick Allen, Bret Saberhagen, Colavito, Albert Belle, Bob Caruthers (to pick an oldie-but-goodie). Some of these guys will get through future versions of the vet's committee, just like some current hall of famers are no better than this class.*

*And lots who were inducted by the Frisch-led vet's committee were much worse.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Mattingly, Baylor, Tiant, Parker, Kaat, Hodges come to my mind as more guys one level or so below.

[Topps206]

While I do not think Colavito himself is a Hall of Famer, these Veterans Committees are remarkably terrible at what they do and an insult to living players.

[clydepepper]

Originally Posted by Topps206

While I do not think Colavito himself is a Hall of Famer, these Veterans Committees are remarkably terrible at what they do and an insult to living players.

What they did to Ron Santo, in particular, was unforgivable!

[clydepepper]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Mattingly, Baylor, Tiant, Parker, Kaat, Hodges come to my mind as more guys one level or so below.

You should compare Luis's record with Drysdale and Hunter.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by clydepepper

You should compare Luis's record with Drysdale and Hunter.

That they are undeserving does not make him deserving.

[MCoxon]

Colavito is one of my favorite players and I have all his cards (except 1959 home run derby), but I don't think he's a hall of fame player. that doesn't mean he isn't beloved, and still relevant, still interviewed.

I also love Minoso and Oliva, in fact I like to collect these near-HOFers because they each have great stories and near-greatness.

It's too bad he's worried about it, but I understand that he would love to be a hall of famer - who wouldn't

I also don't have his 1959 Kahn's. If anyone has one - let me know!

[bravos4evr]

Originally Posted by clydepepper

You should compare Luis's record with Drysdale and Hunter.

all stats career stats

Luis Tiant : 229-172 record (silly stat) - 3.30 ERA, 3.40 FIP, 6.24 K/9 , 2.85 BB per 9 54.8 career fWAR over 3485 inn



Don Drysdale: 209-166 - 2.85 ERA, 3.02 FIP, 6.52 K/9, 2.24 BB/9, 59.3 fWAR over 3433 inn


Catfish Hunter:224-166 3.26 ERA, 3.66 FIP, 5.25 K/9, 2.49 BB/9 37.2 fWAR over 3449 inn


I think Tiant and Drysdale have good cases to be made, But Hunter is pretty far below what we'd accept as HOF level these days.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Those sound like Roy Halladay numbers.

PS I am really surprised Cliff Lee and Roy Oswalt didn't have better career numbers.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by clydepepper

You should compare Luis's record with Drysdale and Hunter.

Hunter 5 rings
Drysdale 3 rings
Tiant 0 rings

[bravos4evr]

Originally Posted by rats60

Hunter 5 rings
Drysdale 3 rings
Tiant 0 rings

Judging an individual by team championships is like judging a golfer only by the Ryder Cup

[Sean]

Originally Posted by rats60

Hunter 5 rings
Drysdale 3 rings
Tiant 0 rings

Remember also that in the '60s and '70s there was no ESPN or MLB Network. The only baseball on television was the local team and the Saturday game of the week. It wasn't unusual to only see a pitcher once or twice a year. But in October everything was televised, and every result was magnified. I think that Hunter got a lot of credit not only because he was on a winning team, but also because he pitched very well in the postseason (mostly with Oakland), when we were all watching.

These games were often the only time people would see him pitch, and this made a very favorable impression. Tiant only got into the playoffs the one time, and that was well past his prime, so he didn't get this "October bump" the way Hunter did.

That may not be fair, but that's the way it worked.