T206 Dahlen HOF Price Impact - Seeking Opinions.

[oldjudge]

The people who saw him play, the 1936 and 1938 HOF voters, gave him 1.3% and 0.4% of the vote, respectively. He does not deserve to be in the Hall.

[darwinbulldog]

They didn't have access to the microprocessors and mutivariate statistical analyses that we have. They weren't stupid. We just have tools now that do a considerably better job of assessing a player's impact on his team's ability to win games than eyewitness memories do. Shame on us if we don't use them.

[bender07]

Originally Posted by oldjudge

The people who saw him play, the 1936 and 1938 HOF voters, gave him 1.3% and 0.4% of the vote, respectively. He does not deserve to be in the Hall.

I disagree with this assessment. I doubt many voters in 1936 saw him play in his heyday during the turn of the century. It wasn't like he was on TV or his exploits be heard on the radio.

[z28jd]

Originally Posted by oldjudge

The people who saw him play, the 1936 and 1938 HOF voters, gave him 1.3% and 0.4% of the vote, respectively. He does not deserve to be in the Hall.

Those same voters gave Jesse Burkett 2 votes one year and one the other. Tim Keefe got one vote total. Kid Nichols got 3 votes each year.

[t206hof]

Dahlen .272 lifetime, that speaks for itself. He should not even be in hall of fame discussion. It's like putting closing pitchers in the hall it absolutely absurd. If you can't pitch more than one inning, you shouldn't be considered a pitcher.

[bn2cardz]

Originally Posted by t206hof

Dahlen .272 lifetime, that speaks for itself. He should not even be in hall of fame discussion. It's like putting closing pitchers in the hall it absolutely absurd. If you can't pitch more than one inning, you shouldn't be considered a pitcher.

So only one stat matters? If he would have got 28 more hits for every 1000 at bats then it would be a different discussion? And the rest is discarded?

[CMIZ5290]

Originally Posted by bn2cardz

So only one stat matters? If he would have got 28 more hits for every 1000 at bats then it would be a different discussion? And the rest is discarded?

+1...

[Orioles1954]

Originally Posted by t206hof

Dahlen .272 lifetime, that speaks for itself. He should not even be in hall of fame discussion. It's like putting closing pitchers in the hall it absolutely absurd. If you can't pitch more than one inning, you shouldn't be considered a pitcher.

A small sampling Hall of Fame position players with less than .272 lifetime batting averages. Want to kick them out?

Johnny Bench, Reggie Jackson, Harmon Killebrew, Eddie Mathews, Willie McCovey, Joe Morgan, Brooks Robinson, Mike Schmidt, Ozzie Smith

[t206hof]

The Hof should be the very elite players. Not medicore players. Shouldn't be more than 100 players in. And it's insane how many people they put in that don't belong

[t206hof]

But what happened to pitchers actually completing games? It's long gone, and saves are a joke. A great starting pitcher it 10 times more valuable than a "closer".

[slipk1068]

Originally Posted by t206hof

But what happened to pitchers actually completing games? It's long gone, and saves are a joke.

This is such a typical comment when looking only at statistics like IP, CG, etc.

The game has evolved. Guys like Matty and Johnson could pitch WAY MORE INNINGS because the fact is, during the deadball era, pitchers didn't pitch hard until someone got to second base. They were almost lobbing the ball up there until someone was in scoring position. Maybe they would bear down when they had 2 strikes on the hitter, but they mostly conserved there arm until they needed it. Small ball.

This made a defensive SS like Dahlen mega valuable to his team.

[Orioles1954]

Originally Posted by t206hof

The Hof should be the very elite players. Not medicore players. Shouldn't be more than 100 players in. And it's insane how many people they put in that don't belong

This is simply not true. There have been 18,174 total players in major league history and 211 have been inducted as players into the Hall of Fame. Meaning 99.9% have not been called by Cooperstown. The idea that the Hall of Fame is letting everyone in is simply hogwash. Not to mention of the several thousand negro league players who toiled in obscurity due to institutionalized racism only 35 have been inducted (that number should probably be doubled). There is room for PLENTY of more.

[t206hof]

Well this is just my opinion, over half of those do not belong. And it will only get worse. It didn't just start though, there are plenty of T206 guys that have no business being in.

[CMIZ5290]

Originally Posted by Orioles1954

This is simply not true. There have been 18,174 total players in major league history and 211 have been inducted as players into the Hall of Fame. Meaning 99.9% have not been called by Cooperstown. The idea that the Hall of Fame is letting everyone in is simply hogwash. Not to mention of the several thousand negro league players who toiled in obscurity due to institutionalized racism only 35 have been inducted (that number should probably be doubled). There is room for PLENTY of more.

I agree with this in its entirety. Also, I think the NFL is much more forgiving and more easily attainable than the MLB, not even close...Just my 2 cents...

[Exhibitman]

Originally Posted by t206hof

It's like putting closing pitchers in the hall it absolutely absurd. If you can't pitch more than one inning, you shouldn't be considered a pitcher.

The game evolves and as it does the people who dominate in the roles that emerge deserve the same consideration as everyone else. Relief pitching has become a critical element of the modern sport and its practitioners are every bit as valuable to their teams as starting pitchers, perhaps even more over a short series. It is not that they "can't" pitch more, it is that they are most valuable to the teams in their role. Mariano Rivera was a huge component of the Yankees' success over the last two decades and deserves HOF consideration--personally I consider him a 1st ballot shoo-in.

[Kenny Cole]

Originally Posted by t206hof

Dahlen .272 lifetime, that speaks for itself. He should not even be in hall of fame discussion. It's like putting closing pitchers in the hall it absolutely absurd. If you can't pitch more than one inning, you shouldn't be considered a pitcher.

Wow. The reason he isn't qualified is that his batting average was too low? I hesitate to call anyone a dumbass, but that statement surely qualifies. Joe Morgan's BA was lower then Dahlen's. Is he qualified?

[t206hof]

Nope shouldn't be in.

[t206hof]

You got it Steven!!!!!!!!

[CMIZ5290]

Originally Posted by t206hof

Nope shouldn't be in.

Bottom line, Dahlen will get in the Hall. As far as his T206 prices? Hard for me t believe they can go any higher (Brooklyn). Having said that, Cobb thought a lot of this guy.....

[bundy462]

Originally Posted by t206hof

Dahlen .272 lifetime, that speaks for itself. He should not even be in hall of fame discussion. It's like putting closing pitchers in the hall it absolutely absurd. If you can't pitch more than one inning, you shouldn't be considered a pitcher.

I don't agree with the comment on closers. The mentality that they have to maintain, domination that the great ones have, and bottom line impact they have on a team is silly to argue. But, to each their own.

However, I find the line of thought interesting and wonder how you feel about guys that are primarily DHs? What about Edgar Martinez who had roughly 70% of his plate appearances as a DH? Frank Thomas with 60%? Thoughts on David Ortiz, who when it's all said and done, is going to land somewhere around 90%?

One can make the same argument applying your rationale that certain players don't do all things "typical" for the position. Silly, right?

[Kenny Cole]

Originally Posted by oldjudge

The people who saw him play, the 1936 and 1938 HOF voters, gave him 1.3% and 0.4% of the vote, respectively. He does not deserve to be in the Hall.

Jay,

I don't imagine most of the voters in 1936 or 1938 ever saw him play. By then he had been out of MLB for 24 years or so. And I feel pretty confident that the very few of those who actually saw him play saw him at the end of his career. That's sort of a different thing than seeing him in his heyday and voting on him based on that.