Baseball Hall of Fame Vote

ctownboy · #1 01-09-2012, 06:51 PM

insidethewrapper,

I can not STAND the New York bias as far as the HOF goes.

I mean, take Rizzuto's stats and have him play for the Reds instead of the Yankees and do you think he even gets a sniff of the HOF? No.

Now, take Larkin's stats and have him play for the Yankees instead of the Reds. Guess what? Not only would he be a Hall Of Famer but probably a first ballot one at that.

David

yanks12025 · #2 01-09-2012, 06:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ctownboy

insidethewrapper,

I can not STAND the New York bias as far as the HOF goes.

I mean, take Rizzuto's stats and have him play for the Reds instead of the Yankees and do you think he even gets a sniff of the HOF? No.

Now, take Larkin's stats and have him play for the Yankees instead of the Reds. Guess what? Not only would he be a Hall Of Famer but probably a first ballot one at that.

Daivd

Maybe cause as a Yankee, he'd won more rings. And winning it all, adds to your stats.

sflayank · #3 01-09-2012, 07:05 PM

i am amazed that no one on this board sees the obvious
last year he got 61%....I would like to know how its possible that so many people didnt think he was a hof'er last year and changed their mind this year
thats the problem with the system....either u belong in or you dont
putting someone in just because theres no one else is ridiculous

YankeeCollector · #4 01-09-2012, 07:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sflayank

i am amazed that no one on this board sees the obvious
last year he got 61%....I would like to know how its possible that so many people didnt think he was a hof'er last year and changed their mind this year
thats the problem with the system....either u belong in or you dont
putting someone in just because theres no one else is ridiculous

+1

T206BrownHindu · #5 01-09-2012, 07:46 PM

How can Tim Raines not be in the Hall? The ones that should lose their voting privileges are the nine yahoos that filled out a blank ballot.

Mark

daves_resale_shop · #6 01-10-2012, 08:58 AM

Gavvy Cravath
Ed Reulbach
Mike Donlin

All of which are more deserving than the likes of mcgwire, bondsn sosa etc...

novakjr · #7 01-09-2012, 07:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sflayank

i am amazed that no one on this board sees the obvious
last year he got 61%....I would like to know how its possible that so many people didnt think he was a hof'er last year and changed their mind this year
thats the problem with the system....either u belong in or you dont
putting someone in just because theres no one else is ridiculous

I think part of that may be because voter want to make sure at least one person get in per year. I honestly believe it's more than a secret ballot. There's much thought put into when a player gets in, rather than just whether he should get in.

Instead of thinking of it like Larkin got in this year because there was no one else worthy on the ballot. I'd like to think that he DIDN'T get in last year, because there was no one else on this years ballot..

Exhibitman · #8 01-09-2012, 08:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sflayank

i am amazed that no one on this board sees the obvious
last year he got 61%....I would like to know how its possible that so many people didnt think he was a hof'er last year and changed their mind this year
thats the problem with the system....either u belong in or you dont
putting someone in just because theres no one else is ridiculous

There are a number of writers who believe that first ballot should be reserved for the very elite ballplayers, like Gwynn, and will not vote for a middle of the road HOFer on the 1st ballot but will do so the next time around.

FWIW, I think Larkin is a worthy HOFer given his position and era. Who was a better SS from 1990-1996? His career WAR is actually better than Gwynn, Snider, Murray, Santo, Carter, McCovey, Banks, Baker and quite a few other HOFers. He got an MVP, 3 Gold Gloves, had over 2300 hits and stole 379 bases. As a shortstop that is HOF worthy stuff. He wasn't expected to hit 50 HR and drive in 120 runs. That wasn't his job, which is why his WAR is better than so many big stats guys--they played at the slugger positions where massive production was expected.

Chris-Counts · #9 01-09-2012, 08:04 PM

"FWIW, I think Larkin is a worthy HOFer given his position and era. Who was a better SS from 1990-1996? His career WAR is actually better than Gwynn, Snider, Murray, Santo, Carter, McCovey, Banks, Baker and quite a few other HOFers. He got an MVP, 3 Gold Gloves, had over 2300 hits and stole 379 bases. As a shortstop that is HOF worthy stuff. He wasn't expected to hit 50 HR and drive in 120 runs. That wasn't his job, which is why his WAR is better than so many big stats guys--they played at the slugger positions where massive production was expected ..."

Adam, I nominate you as a Hall of Fame voter. You're better informed than most of them ...

novakjr · #10 01-09-2012, 08:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

There are a number of writers who believe that first ballot should be reserved for the very elite ballplayers, like Gwynn, and will not vote for a middle of the road HOFer on the 1st ballot but will do so the next time around.

FWIW, I think Larkin is a worthy HOFer given his position and era. Who was a better SS from 1990-1996? His career WAR is actually better than Gwynn, Snider, Murray, Santo, Carter, McCovey, Banks, Baker and quite a few other HOFers. He got an MVP, 3 Gold Gloves, had over 2300 hits and stole 379 bases. As a shortstop that is HOF worthy stuff. He wasn't expected to hit 50 HR and drive in 120 runs. That wasn't his job, which is why his WAR is better than so many big stats guys--they played at the slugger positions where massive production was expected.

Any thoughts on a SS with 2800+ hits, 401 SB's and 11 Gold Gloves?

Big Six · #11 01-09-2012, 08:15 PM

He'll get in...don't know when but he will. He was that good...Raines, too.

novakjr · #12 01-09-2012, 08:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big Six

He'll get in...don't know when but he will. He was that good...Raines, too.

Agree about Trammell and Raines. Now I'm not saying this guy belongs, but I'm still wondering how Lou Whitaker got written off so quickly?

sam majors · #13 01-09-2012, 08:18 PM

I think Larkin was elected because they needed somebody to put in! A very good player but not Hall worthy in my opinion. The Pro football Hall Of Fame is even more watered down! They have to have at least four inducted but no more than seven each year. How foolish is that.

David W · #14 01-10-2012, 02:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by novakjr

Any thoughts on a SS with 2800+ hits, 401 SB's and 11 Gold Gloves?

Vizquel is Ozzie without the back flips....

Ozzie actually has a higher OBP than slugging %, that doesn't happen very often.

There a ton of 60's to 90's SS that are real similar in many ways.

Tony Fernandez, Aparicio, Ozzie, Concepcion, Bowa, Campaneris, Trammel, Burleson, and why some got in and others don't....... who knows.

Not to mention the whole Lou Whitaker thing.....

ctownboy · #15 01-09-2012, 07:08 PM

I have said this before and I will continue to say this, as far as the HOF goes, anybody linked to PED use should be forever banned from baseball.

The Commissioners Office had a rule in place against PED use back in 1993 but the Players Association did not want to adopt it. Because the owners didn't want to fight the Players Association (and risk a strike) they let it slide.

So, I don't see why the players get to have their name go down into the history books (as far as being elected into the HOF) when THEY didn't want to pass a rule against PED use, THEY benefited financially from PED use and THEIR stats were enhanced because of PED use.

David

Chris-Counts · #16 01-09-2012, 07:28 PM

"Larkin, Sutter, man they let anyone in there nowadays ..."

I can't believe anyone would even question Barry Larkin's Hall of Fame credentials. He should have been inducted last year. Unfortunately, it seems to be fashionable for some folks (and tragically, some voters as well) to bash every would-be Hall of Famer, regardless whether they've studied the player's stats. Look up Barry's numbers, compare them to every other existing Hall of Famer at his position, and get back to me when you've done your homework. You'll discover he was better than at least half of them ...

Chris-Counts · #17 01-09-2012, 07:34 PM

"What changed so much from this year to last year with Larkin? Just because no one else isn't going in doesn't mean we need to get someone in just to have a ceremony ..."

Yahoo columnist Tim Brown, who gets to vote, wrote a column last year arguing why Larkin SHOULD NOT be in the Hall of Fame. This year, he wrote a column arguing why Larkin SHOULD be in the Hall of Fame. There was never a problem with Larkin's credentials. Brown's credentials are a different story ...

Orioles1954 · #18 01-09-2012, 07:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris Counts

"What changed so much from this year to last year with Larkin? Just because no one else isn't going in doesn't mean we need to get someone in just to have a ceremony ..."

Yahoo columnist Tim Brown, who gets to vote, wrote a column last year arguing why Larkin SHOULD NOT be in the Hall of Fame. This year, he wrote a column arguing why Larkin SHOULD be in the Hall of Fame. There was never a problem with Larkin's credentials. Brown's credentials are a different story ...

I agree with about Larkin being elected. However, it's important to realize that the Hall of Fame is not necessarily a mandate about how great a player truly is. It is, in fact, a MEDIA AWARD and a MEDIA AWARD only. Just like the Cy Young, MVP, Gold Glove, etc.....it is a media award comprised of sports journalists who may or may not be baseball followers.

ScottFandango · #19 01-10-2012, 06:41 AM

That lack of love for RIZZUTO is surprising....guess you guys never heard of GLUE

RIZZUTO was the glue for many many championships, he was also awarded MVP at the time, rightfully being recognized as a VERY important part of the greatest run ever...

More then hrs in baseball....
RIZZUTO was better, had more championships than maranvile, but nobody complains about him rabbit

The anti new York bias is thick on this board.

tedzan · #20 01-10-2012, 07:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ScottFandango

That lack of love for RIZZUTO is surprising....guess you guys never heard of GLUE

RIZZUTO was the glue for many many championships, he was also awarded MVP at the time, rightfully being recognized as a VERY important part of the greatest run ever...

More then hrs in baseball....
RIZZUTO was better, had more championships than maranvile, but nobody complains about him rabbit

The anti new York bias is thick on this board.

Scott

I'm not sure about "The anti new York bias is thick on this board" ?

Anyhow, I agree with everything else in your post here regarding "The Scooter".

As some of you know, Phil Rizzuto was my nearby neighbor when I grew up in Hillside, NJ. I met him many times and even flew 1st class with him on a 2-hour flight to Chicago in 1984.

One of the best tributes I heard given to Rizzuto was from Ted Williams. I met Ted in the 1980's and we had a great conversation. Ted firmly believed and told me.....

"If Phil Rizzuto was the Red Sox shortstop in the late 1940's and the early 1950's, the Red Sox would have been the AL Champs those years, not the Yankees."

TED Z

z28jd · #21 01-10-2012, 08:58 AM

I think the Rizzuto lovers always miss the point that there is a difference between being a good ballplayer and a hall of famer. Rizzuto was a good ballplayer with one great year that played only for great teams. The Yankees still made the 1955 WS with him barely playing, repeated again in 1956 when he played even less, repeated in 1957 when he wasn't on the team, won again in 1958. They won from 36-39 and 60-64, before and after him, the Yankees won the AL over and over for a long time.

Red Sox wouldn't have won the AL with Rizzuto instead of Vern Stephens because if Rizzuto was in Boston, Stephens would've been in the middle of the Yankees lineups driving in runs. Then Johnny Pesky took over, then in 1952 the Red Sox were horrible, they weren't making up a 16 game difference in 1953 because of a light hitting shortstop and by 54 Rizzuto wasn't that good. The Red Sox wouldn't have won anything more with Rizzuto unless the Yankees only put 8 men in field and left the SS position open

No one denies he had a good career but his numbers blend in with a ton of guys who didn't have a chance to play for the Yankees their entire career. Rizzuto could've played with the Senators his whole career and he wouldn't even sniff the HOF, don't believe me, ask Cecil Travis fans.

Rizzuto never even got the support of the writers who saw him back in the day that Marty Marion did. Marion got 40% of the votes in 1970, 7th highest total and only non-HOF besides Hodges in the top 10. At 11th place you had Allie Reynolds, 12th Johnny VanderMeer and down in 15th, Rizzuto on his 8th try. Only if Marion could've been a star shortstop for a team that went to the WS....

z28jd · #22 01-10-2012, 09:21 AM

Did you know the most comparable player to Rizzuto all-time is Art Fletcher, time to start hoarding his t206 cards for when the veterans committee finally inducts him!

Also in those top 10 comps from baseball-reference for both Rizzuto and Fletcher is Claude Ritchey. One of our board members recently wrote a slightly interesting article on him but they left out his Hall of Fame credentials? I wonder why... http://www.piratesprospects.com/2012...tchey-bio.html

insidethewrapper · #23 01-10-2012, 09:27 AM

World Series Championships have nothing to do with being in or out of the HOF. Banks never won, Ted Williams never won etc. The everyday player can't pitch or manage the team. They were great players and they belong in the HOF. If the Tigers didn't win in '68, does that mean Kaline should not be in the HOF ? That would be insane.

tedzan · #24 01-10-2012, 10:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by z28jd

I think the Rizzuto lovers always miss the point that there is a difference between being a good ballplayer and a hall of famer. Rizzuto was a good ballplayer with one great year that played only for great teams. The Yankees still made the 1955 WS with him barely playing, repeated again in 1956 when he played even less, repeated in 1957 when he wasn't on the team, won again in 1958. They won from 36-39 and 60-64, before and after him, the Yankees won the AL over and over for a long time.

John D.

By 1955, Rizzuto's career was ending. Pardon me for correcting you. He had more than just 1 great year. In 1949, he was runner-up for the AL MVP award to Ted
Williams. Speaking about Ted....I trust his judgement of Rizzuto, when he said to me......

"If Phil Rizzuto was the Red Sox shortstop in the late 1940's and the early 1950's, the Red Sox would have been the AL Champs those years, not the Yankees."

Quote:

Originally Posted by z28jd

Red Sox wouldn't have won the AL with Rizzuto instead of Vern Stephens because if Rizzuto was in Boston, Stephens would've been in the middle of the Yankees lineups driving in runs. Then Johnny Pesky took over, then in 1952 the Red Sox were horrible, they weren't making up a 16 game difference in 1953 because of a light hitting shortstop and by 54 Rizzuto wasn't that good. The Red Sox wouldn't have won anything more with Rizzuto unless the Yankees only put 8 men in field and left the SS position open

John

OK, you are too young to have seen Rizzuto play and I'm too old and did see Rizzuto play from 1949 to 1956. He was a tremendous Lead-Off batter. An expert bunter,
and a good hitter (especially when a lead-off runner was needed). His fielding at SS and his throwing arm were excellent. And, this is what Ted Williams was alluding to.

Rizzuto's enthusiam for the game; and, his ability to execute at bat and on the field are intangibles that are not evident in the statistics.

Quote:

Originally Posted by z28jd

Rizzuto never even got the support of the writers who saw him back in the day that Marty Marion did. Marion got 40% of the votes in 1970, 7th highest total and only non-HOF besides Hodges in the top 10. At 11th place you had Allie Reynolds, 12th Johnny VanderMeer and down in 15th, Rizzuto on his 8th try. Only if Marion could've been a star shortstop for a team that went to the WS....

Rizzuto did not get the support when it came to HOF voting because of guys like Charles Gehringer who had it in for Phil (I've never understood why). Ted Williams
was very influential in getting Phil into the HOF.

Marty Marion should be in the HOF, he was "Mr Shortstop" before Ernie Banks.
Furthermore, considering some of the guys who have been inducted by the Veterans Committee in recent years, Marion, Hodges, Reynolds, and Vander Meer should
all certainly be in the HOF.

P.S.....Give my regards to your Dad. Tell him my 1957 T-Bird is tuned-up and ready to race

TED Z

ctownboy · #25 01-10-2012, 08:19 AM

Scotfandango,

Dave Concepcion played against better competition (African-Americans and actual relief pitchers instead of former starters with dead arms), played for great teams that won World Series, was a better hitter and probably a better defensive Short Stop than Rizzuto and look how much HOF love he has received.

Using Baseball Reference's black ink and gray ink tables for offense and how they relate to how a player stacks up against HOF players, Concepcion scores higher than Rizzuto. Using their comparison of players in general, Concepcion compares to better players than Rizzuto.

If you think Baseball Reference puts too much weight towards the offense then remember that Concepcion and Larry Bowa were the two best defensive Short Stops in the NL until Ozzie Smith came along.

Again, if Concepcion had played in NY and accomplished these things, we would be talking about him as a Hall Of Famer now. But because we are talking about a Latin player who played in Cincinnati during the 1970's and 1980's instead of a guy from NY in the 1950's (who also had a long broadcasting career and a Money Store commercial to keep his name, face and voice in the public eye) we are not doing that.

In short, if people are using the number of World Series rings Rizzuto won (on teams that I think Dickey, DiMaggio, Ruffing, Gomez, Mantle, Berra and Ford, among others, had a LOT more to do with than Rizzuto) or how he was the GLUE for those teams (where in the HOF rules is that stated as a criteria and how many other players could that be used as a reason for their inclusion in the HOF?) then, to me, that means Rizzuto is NOT a Hall Of Fame player. Either that or there are OTHER players out there who should be getting looked at or talked about for the HOF that currently aren't.

Finally, why isn't Ted Simmons or, better yet, Joe Torre NOT being talked about as Hall Of Famers? Both put up great offensive stats as Catchers and Torre had a long and productive career as a Manager (guiding the Yankees to numerous World Series and winning rings to boot).

I have an anti-NY bias because I see too many players as being overhyped just BECAUSE they played for the Yankees (and now the Red Sox) when if they played for another team and did the same things they would be overlooked or their accomplishments put down because they didn't do them in NY.

David

Orioles1954 · #26 01-10-2012, 09:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ctownboy

Scotfandango,

Dave Concepcion played against better competition (African-Americans and actual relief pitchers instead of former starters with dead arms), played for great teams that won World Series, was a better hitter and probably a better defensive Short Stop than Rizzuto and look how much HOF love he has received.

Using Baseball Reference's black ink and gray ink tables for offense and how they relate to how a player stacks up against HOF players, Concepcion scores higher than Rizzuto. Using their comparison of players in general, Concepcion compares to better players than Rizzuto.

If you think Baseball Reference puts too much weight towards the offense then remember that Concepcion and Larry Bowa were the two best defensive Short Stops in the NL until Ozzie Smith came along.

Again, if Concepcion had played in NY and accomplished these things, we would be talking about him as a Hall Of Famer now. But because we are talking about a Latin player who played in Cincinnati during the 1970's and 1980's instead of a guy from NY in the 1950's (who also had a long broadcasting career and a Money Store commercial to keep his name, face and voice in the public eye) we are not doing that.

In short, if people are using the number of World Series rings Rizzuto won (on teams that I think Dickey, DiMaggio, Ruffing, Gomez, Mantle, Berra and Ford, among others, had a LOT more to do with than Rizzuto) or how he was the GLUE for those teams (where in the HOF rules is that stated as a criteria and how many other players could that be used as a reason for their inclusion in the HOF?) then, to me, that means Rizzuto is NOT a Hall Of Fame player. Either that or there are OTHER players out there who should be getting looked at or talked about for the HOF that currently aren't.

Finally, why isn't Ted Simmons or, better yet, Joe Torre NOT being talked about as Hall Of Famers? Both put up great offensive stats as Catchers and Torre had a long and productive career as a Manager (guiding the Yankees to numerous World Series and winning rings to boot).

I have an anti-NY bias because I see too many players as being overhyped just BECAUSE they played for the Yankees (and now the Red Sox) when if they played for another team and did the same things they would be overlooked or their accomplishments put down because they didn't do them in NY.

David

+1

The Yankees would have been a third place team without "Glue" Rizzuto.

byrone · #27 01-10-2012, 03:02 PM

Interesting CBC article about Larry Walker.

He should have more Hall of Fame consideration

http://www.cbc.ca/sports/baseball/ml...me-ballot.html

"It�s clear by looking at Walker�s production over 17 seasons that his numbers stack up with anyone in the Hall.

He won three batting titles, seven Gold Gloves, the National League MVP in 1997 and boasted a lifetime on-base-plus slugging percentage of .965, which is higher than 45 of the 64 outfielders currently in the Hall including Reggie Jackson and Dave Winfield. His .565 slugging percentage also ranks 13th all-time.

�When you look at a guy like Larry Walker and think of the best all-around players from his era, who�s better? Barry Bonds, maybe,� said Glew. �He hit 49 home runs when he won the NL MVP award [and drove in 130]."

novakjr · #28 01-10-2012, 03:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by byrone

Interesting CBC article about Larry Walker.

He should have more Hall of Fame consideration

http://www.cbc.ca/sports/baseball/ml...me-ballot.html

"It�s clear by looking at Walker�s production over 17 seasons that his numbers stack up with anyone in the Hall.

He won three batting titles, seven Gold Gloves, the National League MVP in 1997 and boasted a lifetime on-base-plus slugging percentage of .965, which is higher than 45 of the 64 outfielders currently in the Hall including Reggie Jackson and Dave Winfield. His .565 slugging percentage also ranks 13th all-time.

�When you look at a guy like Larry Walker and think of the best all-around players from his era, who�s better? Barry Bonds, maybe,� said Glew. �He hit 49 home runs when he won the NL MVP award [and drove in 130]."

Huge Larry fan...I completely agree. I never really bought into the whole Colorado factor.. I think it's a lame excuse.

novakjr · #29 01-10-2012, 09:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ctownboy

Scotfandango,

Dave Concepcion played against better competition (African-Americans and actual relief pitchers instead of former starters with dead arms), played for great teams that won World Series, was a better hitter and probably a better defensive Short Stop than Rizzuto and look how much HOF love he has received.

Using Baseball Reference's black ink and gray ink tables for offense and how they relate to how a player stacks up against HOF players, Concepcion scores higher than Rizzuto. Using their comparison of players in general, Concepcion compares to better players than Rizzuto.

If you think Baseball Reference puts too much weight towards the offense then remember that Concepcion and Larry Bowa were the two best defensive Short Stops in the NL until Ozzie Smith came along.

Again, if Concepcion had played in NY and accomplished these things, we would be talking about him as a Hall Of Famer now. But because we are talking about a Latin player who played in Cincinnati during the 1970's and 1980's instead of a guy from NY in the 1950's (who also had a long broadcasting career and a Money Store commercial to keep his name, face and voice in the public eye) we are not doing that.

In short, if people are using the number of World Series rings Rizzuto won (on teams that I think Dickey, DiMaggio, Ruffing, Gomez, Mantle, Berra and Ford, among others, had a LOT more to do with than Rizzuto) or how he was the GLUE for those teams (where in the HOF rules is that stated as a criteria and how many other players could that be used as a reason for their inclusion in the HOF?) then, to me, that means Rizzuto is NOT a Hall Of Fame player. Either that or there are OTHER players out there who should be getting looked at or talked about for the HOF that currently aren't.

Finally, why isn't Ted Simmons or, better yet, Joe Torre NOT being talked about as Hall Of Famers? Both put up great offensive stats as Catchers and Torre had a long and productive career as a Manager (guiding the Yankees to numerous World Series and winning rings to boot).

I have an anti-NY bias because I see too many players as being overhyped just BECAUSE they played for the Yankees (and now the Red Sox) when if they played for another team and did the same things they would be overlooked or their accomplishments put down because they didn't do them in NY.

David

I agree completely. Torre should've been in as a player...He'll get in as a MGR, but I hope that doesn't stop people from pursuing him as a player as well.. A strong case can be made for Ted Simmons. I wouldn't mind seeing him get in(but I'd be ok if he doesn't). Conception should eventually get in. If all goes well, I think it would be fitting to see the two Venezuelan #13 shortstops get in together. Imagine if the BWAA voted in Vizquel, and Veterans voted in Conception the same year. I think that would be a great thing.. Now before anyone jumps down my throat about Vizquel. He's a no brainer in my books.. Arguably one of the two best defensive SS's in history(Smith may or may not have been better), 2800+ hits, 400+ SB's, and a leader both on and off the field. According to Baseball-reference his top 8 "similar batters" in order are- Luis Aparicio, Rabbit Maranville, Ozzie Smith, Bill Dahlen, Dave Conception, Luke Appling, Pee Wee Reese, and Nellie Fox. Everything about Omar screams Hall of Fame...

Robextend · #30 01-10-2012, 10:18 AM

It is a great debate because we all have our own standards and definition of "hall of famer".

I don't consider Larkin, Dawson, Rizzuto, etc...hall of famers. To me they are in the same boat as McGriff, Dale Murphy, Al Oliver, Raines, etc...

Compare Ted Simmons stats to the greatest catchers of all time and tell me why he didn't get any consideration for the HOF. Doesn't make sense to me.

ctownboy · #31 01-10-2012, 10:34 AM

robextend,

Replace Thurman Munson with Ted Simmons on those mid-1970's Yankees teams and Simmons is a Hall Of Famer.

Simmons was in the majors at a younger age than Munson and had a longer career and still his OPS+ is higher than Munson's (117 to 116). Sure, if he had lived, Munson could have put up a few more good seasons to raise his OPS+. However, if Munson had played as long as Simmons did, it is also likely that he would have had a drop off in production and his OPS+ would have fallen.

No, I don't believe in the idea that just because a guy played for the Yankees (or Red Sox) and put up good, but not great, stats for their career that they should some how get a HOF boost for it.

David

howard38 · #32 01-10-2012, 03:29 PM

.

ctownboy · #33 01-11-2012, 12:23 PM

howard38,

1) Concepcion playing against better competition has nothing to do with Rizzuto missing playing time because of WW II. It has EVERYTHING to do with black ball players NOT being allowed to play Major League baseball during the first half of Rizzuto's career.

2) Who is to say that Rizzuto would have put up better numbers if he would have played baseball instead of going into the military? Back then the rules weren't as stringent, as far as safety goes, so there is always the possibility that Rizzuto could have been at Second Base waiting for a throw from Joe Gordon and a runner does a barrel roll into Rizzuto when trying to breakup a Double Play and Rizzuto tears knee ligaments and can never play again.

Now, I give more credence to the idea that Ted Williams missed out on putting up better stats because of the years he missed due to military service because A) he was a better hitter and B) he played the Outfield and had less chance of being involved in a collision and getting hurt.

3) According to Ted Z, who is a self proclaimed Rizzuto fan, Rizzuto was the lead off hitter for the Yankees from 1949 to 1955. If this is true, then it means he had guys like DiMaggio, Mantle and Berra batting behind him. Yet, during those five or six years, Rizzuto scored 100 or more Runs only twice. Furthermore, Ted Z said he was a good hitter. Yet, again, during that time period, he had 150 or more Hits only twice.

Now, if you look at Concepcion's stats and career, here is what you will find.

1) For the first four years he was in the Majors, he was not an everyday player.

2) Once he became an everyday player, he hit at the bottom of the order. Just imagine what his stats would have looked like if Sparky Anderson had moved him to the top of the order and he had had Joe Morgan, Johnny Bench, Tony Perez and George Foster batting behind him?

Nope, I look at their stats, the teams they played on and the competition they faced and say that Concepcion was a better player and deserves to be in the HOF more than Rizzuto does.

Now, if you think neither deserve to be in the HOF that is fine.

David

ValKehl · #34 01-11-2012, 12:27 PM

Thomas Boswell's (he's the very-long-time baseball writer for the Wash. Post) column in today's newspaper re Larkin, Bagwell and the PED candidates is a good read: http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports...8oP_story.html
Val

ctownboy · #35 01-11-2012, 12:46 PM

packs,

If you want to think Rizzuto is a Hall Of Famer because of his broadcasting career that is fine (then I will counter that if having a lengthy MLB career and then an even longer broadcasting career are good criteria to use for people getting elected to the HOF then Joe Nuxhall should be in).

However, the fact is, Rizzuto was NOT elected to the HOF by the people responsible for electing sportswriters and broadcasters. he was elected by the Veterans Committee. This means he was elected based on what he did as a player.

Even Ted Z, a self-proclaimed Rizzuto fan, admits that Ted Williams used his influence to get Rizzuto elected. So, Rizzuto was not elected to the HOF when he was on the regular ballot and it took an all-time great like Williams to lobby for him with the Veterans Committee.

To me, that is like George W. Bush getting into Yale because of who his Father and Grand Father were. Both Rizzuto and George W. made it into prestigious institutions but neither did it on their own merits. They had outside influences help to get them in.

Again, like I said in another post, so what that Rizzuto lost time due to serving in WW II? Just because he lost time doesn't mean his stats would have gotten better. Sure, he could have played during all of that time and performed well. Conversely, he also could have been taken out at Second Base by a guy trying to break up a Double Play, had his knee ruined and never played again. Nobody knows.

So one cant just assume he would have played, played well and put up better numbers. You have to look at what he did on the field and the numbers he actually put up.

Again, I say there were other players on the Yankees who were better than Rizzuto and had more input to them winning games than Rizzuto did. Just because Rizzuto happened to be a starter on those teams that won World Series doesn't mean he automatically should be considered a better player than what he was.

David

yanksfan09 · #36 01-09-2012, 07:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ctownboy

insidethewrapper,

I can not STAND the New York bias as far as the HOF goes.

I mean, take Rizzuto's stats and have him play for the Reds instead of the Yankees and do you think he even gets a sniff of the HOF? No.

Now, take Larkin's stats and have him play for the Yankees instead of the Reds. Guess what? Not only would he be a Hall Of Famer but probably a first ballot one at that.

Daivd

I don't think that's true. It hasn't helped Don Mattingly get many votes, also votes weren't crazy for Bernie Williams. I'm not saying those guys or Larkin should be in though. I think it's getting a bit watered down these days. If you really have to think of a player he probably shouldn't be in.

I also agree with last comment...what changed so much from this year to last year with Larkin? Just because no one else isn't going in doesn't mean we need to get someone in just to have a ceremony.

Finally, Brade Radke and Mueller etc...getting votes?

These people should absolutely lose their voting priveledges. How can you possibly justify any votes for those players?

Orioles1954 · #37 01-09-2012, 07:21 PM

The whole "Hall of Fame is too watered down" argument is not very compelling to me. A sport with 150+ years of professional history and there are only 240ish enshrined? My goodness, the Baseball Hall of Fame is a fraction of the other three North American sports. Plenty of room if even a hundred more were added. My problem is that guys who deserve is it like Buck O'Neil, Lefty O'Doul, Cecil Travis, Gil Hodges and a slew of other 19th century and Negro League greats aren't in.

triwak · #38 01-09-2012, 10:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Orioles1954

The whole "Hall of Fame is too watered down" argument is not very compelling to me. A sport with 150+ years of professional history and there are only 240ish enshrined? My goodness, the Baseball Hall of Fame is a fraction of the other three North American sports. Plenty of room if even a hundred more were added. My problem is that guys who deserve is it like Buck O'Neil, Lefty O'Doul, Cecil Travis, Gil Hodges and a slew of other 19th century and Negro League greats aren't in.

Totally agree!!!

And I believe Morris will get in next year, along with Bagwell AND Biggio. PED users will be destined to wait for their veteran's committee nominations. The best ones may eventually get in, but it'll be a long time - perhaps after their deaths.

packs · #39 01-09-2012, 11:00 PM

I was glad to see Mattingly getting more votes this year. I'm surprised at how few votes Bernie Williams got.

I think Larkin is a deserving HOFer. Today short stops are expected to hit 30 home runs and steal 30 bases. However, until Larkin did it in 1996 no other short stop ever had. He was truly ahead of his peers.

I don't think Morris should ever get in. He wasn't the best pitcher of the 80s, he just had the most wins. Roger Clemens won 95 games in 5 seasons in the 80s. Was Morris better than he was? Clemens also won back to back CYs in the 1980s. Morris never finished higher than 3rd.

For a guy who is supposed to be the best pitcher of the 80s, Morris posted a 4.00 ERA three times and posted a 3.94 in 1988. He would go on to post a 4.00 or higher ERA in 4 of his last 5 seasons after 1989.

Clutch-Hitter · #40 01-09-2012, 11:27 PM

The thing about the drugs is that a man can remain bulked up throughout a grueling 162 game season while using them. It would seem unlikely that they could stick to a weightlifting schedule. I didn't follow the news, but didn't they only target the superstars and/or people breaking records? If thats the case, the players who were using drugs but not tested will get in with their less significant careers. A couple of people mentioned here were quite bulky towards the end of their careers, deep into the seasons. I wouldn't be surprised if nearly all players used, therefore Mac and Bonds should be compared to their peers. They were much better than all the other users playing on the same field.

And I'm not a Bonds fan BTW

PS: steroids will not help a man hit a 92 MPH slider

tjb1952tjb · #41 01-10-2012, 02:47 AM

"Biggio should get in before any of these guys. His stats might be better than you think. He's the only player in MLB history with 3,000 H, 600 2B, 400 SB, and 250 HR. This is from a guy that played 14 of his 20 seasons between C and 2B. And he was an All Star at both positions."

Totally agree........Craig Biggio should be a first ballot HOFer.

tbob · #42 01-10-2012, 12:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by packs

I don't think Morris should ever get in. He wasn't the best pitcher of the 80s, he just had the most wins. Roger Clemens won 95 games in 5 seasons in the 80s. Was Morris better than he was? Clemens also won back to back CYs in the 1980s. Morris never finished higher than 3rd.

For a guy who is supposed to be the best pitcher of the 80s, Morris posted a 4.00 ERA three times and posted a 3.94 in 1988. He would go on to post a 4.00 or higher ERA in 4 of his last 5 seasons after 1989.

I have to disagree with you on Morris. He was a big game pitcher and only Sandy Koufax had as many Babe Ruth awards as Morris (best player in the postseason). Yes he didn't win 300 games (only won 254) but arguably there will never be another 300 game winner in MLB. Morris was a gamer and never wanted to come out of a game, often wanting to pitch all 9 innings. I think this hurt his ERA because of late inning runs scored against him when he was tiring but had a lead. He won 162 games during the 80's, a MLB best, and his 7th game 10 inning shutout of the Braves in the 1991 WS was arguably the greatest pitching feat in history because of what was at stake, even better than Larsen's perfect game. He was a 5 time All-Star and started 14 consecutive opening games. His ERA ended up at 3.90 but he was a dominant force on the mound.

packs · #43 01-10-2012, 01:12 PM

Even Morris' post-season ERA is almost 4.00. People keep saying no one will win 300 games again but since Morris' retirement Roger Clemens, Randy Johnson, Greg Maddux, and Tom Glavine all went on to win 300 games.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
For Sale: Baseball Hall of Fame Rookie Cards	bcbgcbrcb	1950 to 1959 Baseball cards- B/S/T	0	06-14-2011 07:59 AM
Let's see your favorite Baseball Hall of Fame Rookie Card	bcbgcbrcb	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	53	02-18-2011 05:20 AM
Wanted: 1995 Baseball Hall of Fame Game Ticket - Tigers vs Cubs	Archive	Baseball Memorabilia B/S/T	0	03-21-2009 09:11 PM
Non Hall of Fame 3x5 Baseball Autographs for Sale	Archive	Baseball Memorabilia B/S/T	0	05-16-2008 08:36 AM
Baseball Hall of Fame new website	Archive	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	0	07-20-2007 08:03 AM