Early Hall Discussion:

[nolemmings]

Please allow me to “pump” (new term for me) my favorite Twin.
Joe Mauer played the majority of his games as a catcher during the first ten seasons of his career, from 2004-2013, at which time he met the minimum time needed to qualify for the Hall of Fame. IMO, he earned it then.

As a catcher, Mauer won three batting titles– only two other catchers in MLB history have won any. He batted .300 or better seven of those ten seasons-- once reaching .365-- and more than .290 in two others. During that time he was an All Star 6 times and won an MVP. He also won three gold gloves and led his league in fielding percentage for catchers three times (9th all-time). Back in that era when strikeouts were considered embarrassing and at some level shameful, Mauer walked more than he struck out six of those ten seasons, falling three short (walks vs. Ks) in two others and six short once. Mauer was a .323 hitter in 10 seasons as a catcher with an .823 OPS. One can only wonder what further numbers were reachable if not for the concussion, but I believe the ones just cited make him a HOFer anyway.

For those who don’t recall or did not know, the following is what happened to Joe, as recounted by sportswriter LaVelle Neal:
“On Aug. 19, 2013, Mauer took a foul to the mask off the bat of Mets first baseman Ike Davis. It was a career-altering moment for Mauer that also changed the course of Twins history. Mauer, like several catchers that season, landed on the seven-day concussion disabled list. One week wasn't enough for the symptoms to go away. Two weeks wasn't enough. Or a month. Mauer missed the remainder of the season and needed about two months following the season for the symptoms to finally leave. He was sensitive to light. He was forced to change rooms if one of his twin daughters, about 6 months old at the time, began to cry.

When he returned to spring training in 2014, he was a first baseman. Doctors concluded that Mauer had suffered a severe concussion, making him at risk for worse outcomes if he suffered more. This came after teammate, friend and fellow AL MVP Justin Morneau suffered a concussion in 2010 that also altered his career.”

I know there are other tales of woe for players who could claim "what if", but wanted to make clear that Joe Mauer's move to first base occurred after he had put up HOF stats and that he was one of the brightest of stars of his era--the antithesis of an accumulator.

[G1911]

If it was my ballot, I would immediately vote for:
Todd Helton
Adrian Beltre
Joe Mauer
Jeff Kent

I would also vote for, since they put in Ortiz and cannot logically keep the steroid line anymore:
Alex Rodriguez
Gary Sheffield

Utley, Wright and Beltran I'd have to examine closer to decide.

[Mike D.]

Beltran had a pretty good showing in his first year, which bodes well for the future. I don't think this is his year, but think he eventually makes it.

The Best Rookie Cards Of Hall Of Fame Candidate Carlos Beltran

[jayshum]

I forgot about Beltran since he was under 50% last year. I think he takes a big jump this year since a lot of voters may have skipped him due to the Astros scandal. I don't know if he'll get to 75%, but I think he'll be at least in the mid 60s.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Mike D.

Beltran had a pretty good showing in his first year, which bodes well for the future. I don't think this is his year, but think he eventually makes it.

The Best Rookie Cards Of Hall Of Fame Candidate Carlos Beltran

We've discussed before, but not clear to me why if one card has his name but not his pic, and another card has his pic but the wrong name, the first is considered his RC. I'd rather have the picture.

[Mike D.]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

We've discussed before, but not clear to me why if one card has his name but not his pic, and another card has his pic but the wrong name, the first is considered his RC. I'd rather have the picture.

Yeah, it's an odd one, and not one where I think there's a clear "right" answer, although the hobby clearly has spoken.

I can only imagine that when Beltran eventually makes the Hall of Fame, Fanatics will "buy back" a bunch of these, cut them up, and "fix" the problem.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Mike D.

Yeah, it's an odd one, and not one where I think there's a clear "right" answer, although the hobby clearly has spoken.

I can only imagine that when Beltran eventually makes the Hall of Fame, Fanatics will "buy back" a bunch of these, cut them up, and "fix" the problem.

My solution was to buy the SP although not technically a rookie card.

[Mike D.]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

My solution was to buy the SP although not technically a rookie card.

Agreed...while technically a prospect card, it's actually got Beltran on it, in both name and picture. It's also tougher to find than the Topps Traded.

[clydepepper]

Originally Posted by G1911

If it was my ballot, I would immediately vote for:
Todd Helton
Adrian Beltre
Joe Mauer
Jeff Kent

I would also vote for, since they put in Ortiz and cannot logically keep the steroid line anymore:
Alex Rodriguez
Gary Sheffield

Utley, Wright and Beltran I'd have to examine closer to decide.

IMO

Cheaters can go in after they die (they don't deserve the honor more than Santo or Minoso, etc.) or after I die (cus I won't care then) whichever comes last.

bonds doesn't not deserve to be honored the same way Mr. Aaron was.

Again, lower the standards once I'm gone...I definitely won't give a rodents lower GI track about it.

replies? blah-blah-blah I've heard ALL the other arguments...do not care.

IMO
.

[bk400]

Originally Posted by clydepepper

IMO

Cheaters can go in after they die (they don't deserve the honor more than Santo or Minoso, etc.) or after I die (cus I won't care then) whichever comes last.

bonds doesn't not deserve to be honored the same way Mr. Aaron was.

Again, lower the standards once I'm gone...I definitely won't give a rodents lower GI track about it.

replies? blah-blah-blah I've heard ALL the other arguments...do not care.

IMO
.

I will make the narrow argument that Hank Aaron's accomplishments approach those of Jackie Robinson. I think it is staggering what he did under so much pressure and with so much racial hatred directed toward him. Barry Bonds could have hit 900 home runs; he'll never be Hank Aaron.

[Peter_Spaeth]

How do we know what players from the past would have done had PEDs beein available to them? Aaron took greenies, yes? I think the assumption that players in other eras were morally superior is borne of nostalgia bias.

[todeen]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

How do we know what players from the past would have done had PEDs beein available to them? Aaron took greenies, yes? I think the assumption that players in other eras were morally superior is borne of nostalgia bias.

I can't remember the history book I read, authors last name was Reiss, but his book showed how baseball, gambling, and cheating were connected. Fathers didn't want daughters to date ball players.

Sent from my SM-G9900 using Tapatalk

[bk400]

(A lot of fathers today would probably prefer their daughters marry the nice heart surgeon, as opposed to Derek Jeter or A Rod...

Rightly or wrongly, players are judged by the standards of the time. I'm not a baseball historian, but I suspect that Pete Rose in the 1920s is a first ballot Hall of Famer. Babe Ruth in the 1980s might have ended up like....Pete Rose.

I suppose that there are some athletes whose legacies are tarnished at that inflection point when standards change and the "everyone else is doing it argument" suddenly fails in the public eye. Lance Armstrong comes to mind, and maybe that also applies to a guy like Barry Bonds.

But I still maintain that Hank Aaron's athletic legacy is far greater than the sum of his statistics. Hank Aaron to me is like Jesse Owens. Carl Lewis may have won more gold medals in the end, but he'll never be Jesse Owens.

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

How do we know what players from the past would have done had PEDs beein available to them? Aaron took greenies, yes? I think the assumption that players in other eras were morally superior is borne of nostalgia bias.

We know that pitchers have always done nefarious things to baseballs, and many hitters over the years have modified (corked) their bats, and there are plenty of stories about deadball era third basemen, like McGraw, tugging at a baserunner's belt to hold him up (when there were only one or two umpires.)

Whether these things can be considered immoral I'm not sure, but certainly they were attempts to gain advantage while operating outside the rules. If old-time ballplayers had access to pills and needles that could make them better and extend their careers, of course some would've gone that route.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Mark17

We know that pitchers have always done nefarious things to baseballs, and many hitters over the years have modified (corked) their bats, and there are plenty of stories about deadball era third basemen, like McGraw, tugging at a baserunner's belt to hold him up (when there were only one or two umpires.)

Whether these things can be considered immoral I'm not sure, but certainly they were attempts to gain advantage while operating outside the rules. If old-time ballplayers had access to pills and needles that could make them better and extend their careers, of course some would've gone that route.

I think within an era it's fair to contrast athletes who don't seem to have cheated with those that did (Carl Lewis vs Ben Johnson, Bonds vs Griffey, etc.). But I don't buy the generational comparisons and smarmy assertions that past generations were somehow, as a whole, more virtuous and today's players are scum. My guess is most of the guys who popped greenies also would have done stronger PEDs had they been available.