HOF -> Bonds & clemens

[Peter_Spaeth]

http://www.sbnation.com/2013/12/30/5...nies-hall-fame

[rats60]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

http://www.sbnation.com/2013/12/30/5...nies-hall-fame

http://www.steroidsinbaseball.net/commish/vincent.html

[bravos4evr]

The "greenies" argument falls apart under cursory statistical analysis. IN THE HISTORY OF BASEBALL, not one single player had a second career peak after age 32. Between 1994 and 2006 something like 28 players had second career peaks after age 32. (not to mention all the players who were able to stay in MLB because of PED's where otherwise they'd have been out of the game)

That era is reflected in the power surges, the statistical anomalies and the eye test that it was bad for the game and unnatural. I think Bonds and Clemens are in because they were already HOF'ers even if they retired before their 2nd peak. The rest???? well, I'd say no. Most of em wouldn't have reached their levels of performance without them.

as far as the tired Pete Rose argument is concerned, he gambled on games, he lied about it, and has consistently shifted the truth until it was financially fortuitous for him to half ass tell it. (new books) Not to mention HE AGREED to his punishment. (and he's probably one of the top 3 or 4 most overrated players of all time due to his lack of power, late career collapse and mediocre glove)

[EvilKing00]

I see it very simply, voters didnt want to vote for "them" cause they cheated...

cheating is cheating. Roids, greenies, scuffing balls, corking bats, etc

Who was the best of each era?

Hof is a museum of the history of the best players in each era.

Wasnt bonds one of the best in his? Did he do roids? Yes.

Did piazza? As a huge met fan, I dont know, maybe.

[hysell]

Originally Posted by bravos4evr

The "greenies" argument falls apart under cursory statistical analysis. IN THE HISTORY OF BASEBALL, not one single player had a second career peak after age 32. Between 1994 and 2006 something like 28 players had second career peaks after age 32. (not to mention all the players who were able to stay in MLB because of PED's where otherwise they'd have been out of the game)

That era is reflected in the power surges, the statistical anomalies and the eye test that it was bad for the game and unnatural. I think Bonds and Clemens are in because they were already HOF'ers even if they retired before their 2nd peak. The rest???? well, I'd say no. Most of em wouldn't have reached their levels of performance without them.

as far as the tired Pete Rose argument is concerned, he gambled on games, he lied about it, and has consistently shifted the truth until it was financially fortuitous for him to half ass tell it. (new books) Not to mention HE AGREED to his punishment. (and he's probably one of the top 3 or 4 most overrated players of all time due to his lack of power, late career collapse and mediocre glove)

Ok, NICK , we all know the Rose story by now ! Why do we even have a gambling rule in baseball ? Answer is, owner Charles Comiskey , cheap ass ! That"s why ! Paying other HOFers like Eddie Collins $ 15,000 in 1915 , holding out other stars ,so they would not reach there bonus ! For starting the problem & what price did he pay, he is a HOFer ? Please! P.Rose on the overrated part ,There is a white {of} ,that played in New York , you {MAY] want to put on your list { ?} Now for the Rose thing ,He holds MLB records, that may NEVER get broken !,he is the only player to be a ALL*STAR at 4 PO"S 2b,of,3b & 1b .Lack of power , so is Cobb overrated for hitting less HR's than Rose did , I think not! A mediocre glove? He has a career fielding pct .991 in the of ,top 10 all-time ? Like he is in most stat"s ? SH also,which a lot of people can not do!No body played harder?You are big vrs PED/drug users , Rose cheated the Reds,They cheated all of baseball by your arguments & I think your reaching on the Bonds/Clemens remark about HOFers before they used ,when ever that was?Robert.

[bravos4evr]

Originally Posted by hysell

Ok, NICK , we all know the Rose story by now ! Why do we even have a gambling rule in baseball ? Answer is, owner Charles Comiskey , cheap ass ! That"s why ! Paying other HOFers like Eddie Collins $ 15,000 in 1915 , holding out other stars ,so they would not reach there bonus ! For starting the problem & what price did he pay, he is a HOFer ? Please! P.Rose on the overrated part ,There is a white {of} ,that played in New York , you {MAY] want to put on your list { ?} Now for the Rose thing ,He holds MLB records, that may NEVER get broken !,he is the only player to be a ALL*STAR at 4 PO"S 2b,of,3b & 1b .Lack of power , so is Cobb overrated for hitting less HR's than Rose did , I think not! A mediocre glove? He has a career fielding pct .991 in the of ,top 10 all-time ? Like he is in most stat"s ? SH also,which a lot of people can not do!No body played harder?You are big vrs PED/drug users , Rose cheated the Reds,They cheated all of baseball by your arguments & I think your reaching on the Bonds/Clemens remark about HOFers before they used ,when ever that was?Robert.

there is a rule because people threw a world series, end of story. their reasons for it are unimportant

Pete Rose is overrated, I'm sorry. He took 2804 more plate appearances to garner 67 more hits. His career wRC+ (weighted runs created the most accurate hitting stat we have as it weighs the type of hits and is adjusted for park and league, with an average score being 100) of 121 is not even good enough for the top 300 all time (whereas Ty Cobb's 165 is good enough for 8th all time so clearly Cobb is not overrated) Rose not only gambled and lied, he kept lying and used it to his advantage to magically come clean when it was profitable for him to do so. He's a scumbag. He's a HOF player but not "inner circle" and I think the best thing to do is wait for him to die then let him in.


P.S. fielding percentage? really? that's like the most worthless statistic in the world because it doesn't account for range. a statue with inability to move could have a 1.000 fielding % if it never made an error, but it would be a far worse fielder than a player who created more outs but made a few errors along the way.

[earlywynnfan]

Originally Posted by bravos4evr

a statue with inability to move could have a 1.000 fielding % if it never made an error, but it would be a far worse fielder than a player who created more outs but made a few errors along the way.

Steve Garvey??

[bravos4evr]

Originally Posted by earlywynnfan

Steve Garvey??

hahaha! nice!

I was thinking more along the lines of Adam Dunn, but your's works too!

That's the thing with fielding % it really doesn't tell us much about how good a defender a player is. Let us compare 2 SS's from 2016 :

Player A had a fielding % of .991

Player B had a fielding % of .982

if that's all we looked at one would say player A was the better defender, BUT!

Player A had 180 put outs and 389 assists (along with 86 double plays) in 1163 innings with 5 errors with 3 defensive runs saved and an ultimate zone rating per 150 games of 11.4

Player B had 198 put outs,337 assists and 76 double plays in 1045 innings with 10 errors with 18 defensive runs saved and a UZR/150 of 25.1

so, upon a deeper dive into the numbers we see that Player B had a far better defensive year than Player A with 15 more DRS in 118 less innings.

(Player A is Jose iglesias, Player B is Andrelton Simmons)


remember UZR and DRS account for positioning at the start of the play, range covered and the % chance that play is made (they are put in tranches based on %)

For an even more eye opening expose' of the mediocrity of fielding %, career SS rating since 1871 have Troy Tulowitski #1 with a career fielding % of .985 Ozzie Smith is 14th with a .978 (behind Cal Ripken! lol)