Completely different era...if watching baseball in the 70's Garvey was one of the players everyone copied when playing wiffleball in the backyard.
I love Bagwell as a player but he just misses the mark.
2017 Baseball HOF Ballot-What Do You Think?
- Thread starter colbert17
- Start date
Completely different era...if watching baseball in the 70's Garvey was one of the players everyone copied when playing wiffleball in the backyard.
I love Bagwell as a player but he just misses the mark.
McGriff earns it strictly for being in the best commercial of time. Tom Emanskis baseball video.
Dwight Evans is one of the most under-rated OF ever ... and I agree should be seriously considered for HOF. But other than his fielding, he is really a compiler of stats - but not enough stats were compiled. If a player does not have the big years enough, they better compile a lot. But Dwight Evans is really under-rated as a player.
Darrell Evans is also seriously under-rated ... though he is not as good as Dwight.
I think Dwight Evans was a better overall player than Parker, but Parker was a better hitter, in my opinion. But Parker is NOT in the Hall of Fame.
Winfield is in another realm versus Parker of Dwight Evans in terms of being a compiler. He has over 3000 hits (a big milestone for combined longevity and excellence), over 450 HR, over 1800 RBI, 7 GG and a better OPS+ than Dwight Evans.
I grew up in a world of nick names. It is somewhat a lost art. Gimme the Crime Dawg Mr Mcgriff.All the rest are deserving or close to it .
Understood, but WAR is designed to allow comparisons across leagues, years and eras. And Bagwell is far ahead there. We can agree to disagree, but I don't think it's surprising Bagwell is on the cusp of the HOF and Garvey peaked at 42.6% of the vote.
He'll get in this year. He was only 15 votes short last year (71.6% of the vote). Every player who has received at least 68% of the vote ahead of Bagwell and Raines, who had 69.8% last year, was eventually selected.
I assume you mean consistency at the plate? Because as throwing goes, he was anything but. He definitely had a cannon, but was known to throw a few into the stands. In fact, I just looked it up and he led his league's outfielders in errors 8 times.
Zap,
Question about greatness vs. compilers.
Don Sutton-300+ wins makes him a no brainer. But was he ever a dominant pitcher??
On the nights he pitched did the opponents clubhouse think, "Crap Sutton's pitching" like Carlton, Gibson , etc. When you faced him was it like "Man this guys a Hall of Famer" or was he a very good pitcher who pitched a long time??
Question about greatness vs. compilers.
Don Sutton-300+ wins makes him a no brainer. But was he ever a dominant pitcher??
On the nights he pitched did the opponents clubhouse think, "Crap Sutton's pitching" like Carlton, Gibson , etc. When you faced him was it like "Man this guys a Hall of Famer" or was he a very good pitcher who pitched a long time??
I'm the wrong guy to ask, Sutton had the best right handed curveball I've ever faced. I had 18 home runs and 60 RBI in July at AAA Columbus in 1978 when I got the call up to the show.
I faced Sutton soon after the call up for the first time, I remember seeing a ball with no visible rotation (recognizing the spin of the ball out of the pitchers hand is your first job as a hitter to figure out the pitch…great pitchers make pitch recognition very difficult)
The ball started behind my left ear and ended up low and away on the outside corner…Willie Stargell said welcome back to the big leagues kid.
Lets be clear, one hop bullet throws from the outfield that lead to bang bang plays will tie up fielders and lead to errors.
Lee Mazzilli like pop gun arms rarely lead to errors.
If Maz ever read this he'd wanna fight me…LOL
I played CF through high school, so I'm acutely aware of an infielder's ability to create an error on a good throw. To my recollection, I never made a bad throw but somehow still had a few errors. LOL
Hoffman, Guerrero, Bagwell and Schilling.
I know Schilling is a close call but what puts him over the top for me is his post game record. He was clutch when it counted most and loved the big game setting.
Bagwell came so close last year he will garner the additional votes this year.
I know Schilling is a close call but what puts him over the top for me is his post game record. He was clutch when it counted most and loved the big game setting.
Bagwell came so close last year he will garner the additional votes this year.
Thanks for checking this. Those stats are in the middle range of guys who are in the Hall at their positions. If you look at various HOF statistical comparisons like JAWS, you will see they are right around the average for Hall of Famers at their position - not anywhere near marginal. Virtually every other player in the Top 20 at their positions is IN- and yet they are not even mentioned by many - 17 and 20 years in the Bigs. It can't be because of their fielding ability. They were both considered superior fielders.
Yes I meant at the plate.
- Top 10 in MVP voting (2000, 2002, 2004(won), 2005, 2006, 2007)
- Top 10 in AVG (1998, 2000, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007)
- Top 10 in home runs (1998, 1999, 2000, 2002, 2004, 2005, 2007, 2010)
- Top 10 in RBI (1999, 2000, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2010)
- Top 10 in slugging percentage (1998, 1999, 2000, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008)
- Top 10 in OBA (2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2007)
- Top 10 in OPS (1999, 2000, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008)
- Top 10 in hits (1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2004, 2006)
- Top 10 in runs (2002, 2004)
- Top 10 in stolen bases (2001, 2002)
See also
In answer to your question, I watched Mussina out pitch Randy Johnson in the playoffs.
I do not believe Schilling is really a close call at all ... it is ONLY his post season performances that even bring him to the area of close call.
Some have said there are plenty of worse pitchers than Schilling in the Hall of Fame. This is true. But those pitchers were likely MISTAKES, and should not be the reason OTHER mistakes should be inducted.
Basically, if Schilling had not had spectacularly good post season performances, he would NEVER even be in the discussion for the Hall of Fame, not even close.
His best case for the Hall of Fame is:
1) Spectacular post season success ... maybe best, or at worst case 3rd best, in baseball history.
2) ERA+ of 127, which is very good.
3) He had several "big" seasons ... often a criteria for potential Hall of Famers.
BUT the case AGAINST Schilling is actually much stronger:
1) His great post season success represents a VERY small sample size for his entire career: Just 133 IP versus almost 3300 total IP pitched in the regular season. Though fortuitously timed (either by luck or the difficult to define "clutchness"), many pitchers can show 130-150 innings of such brilliance. The timeliness and importance appropriately gets Schilling attention, but should only get him over the top if he was close ANYWAY ... which he is not, in my opinion.
2) Though he had several "big" seasons ... 3 20-win seasons (which is 2 more than a Hall of Famer like Don Sutton, I think), he STILL only had 216 regular season career wins. In fact he had EIGHT (8) of his last 18 seasons where he won 9 or FEWER games ... in other words, he had almost 3 times more seasons winning 9 or fewer games than 20 or more games.
3) Though he had several big seasons, he NEVER won the Cy Young. He did finish 2nd in those 3 big seasons. But basically, he was never considered the best pitcher in his league. Also, though he did lead the league in a season in a number of pitching categories in his career, he never led the league in ERA, and only 4 times had an ERA below 3.00. The other problem was that outside of his 3 big years, and one other year, he was NEVER considered amongst the top pitchers in his league. He only finished in the top TEN (10) of the Cy Young voting 4 times (contrast to Mussina, who never won a Cy Young, and did not have as many "big" years as Schilling, but finished in the top 6 in Cy Young voting 9 times).
4) Of his 10 most comparable peers, 9 are NOT in the Hall of Fame ... and none of those 9 will likely EVER be in the Hall of Fame. The 2 most comparable are truly similar (over 900 score from Baseball-Reference.com - Hall of Famers tend to NOT have peers that are truly similar): Kevin Brown and Bob Welch. Others: CC Sabathia,Tim Hudson, Orel Hershiser, Freddie Fitzsimmons, Milt Pappas, Mark Buerhle, Bartolo Colon and John Smoltz. Other then Smoltz (who is in the Hall of Fame), do any of those SP look like Hall of Famers? Some have said Kevin Brown, others might say Orel Hershiser. Kevin Brown has a very similar career: Similar wins (but fewer), similar ERA (but better), similar ERA+, had some big years (but his big years were not as many, nor as good as Schilling's), similarly not winning a Cy Young ... but Schilling was a much better K pitcher, and was also much better in the post season. Kevin Brown was similar, but in my opinion distinctly LESSER than Schilling. Hershiser is a different case ... Not as similar to Schilling as was Brown, and owned a spectacular in-season record, of course, and had the ONE truly MONSTER year, which won him a Cy Young. Hershiser also had an outstanding post season performance, but distinctly lesser than Schilling's ... similar to Hershiser's career ... similar to Schilling but distinctly lesser. There is, quite frankly, no comparison to Smoltz. Smoltz is way superior a Hall of Fame candidate than Schilling. Smoltz and Schilling essentially overlapped almost exactly (1988 - 2007 for Schilling, 1988 - 2009 for Smoltz). They had essentially similar win-loss records, similar ERA's (Smoltz's was lower, but in the NL), similar ERA+'s, similar K's (Schilling had a few more K's). Schilling had 3 big years as a starter (3 times 20 wins), while Smoltz did only had ONE (1) 20-win season ... but Smoltz won the Cy Young that year, which Schilling was never able to do. Smoltz had just 4 seasons with 9 or fewer wins - not including his 3 seasons as a relief pitcher (to Schilling's 8). BUT ... Smoltz was essentially Schilling, but with THREE seasons where he was either the BEST or close to the best CLOSER, as well.
I am sorry: Schilling just does not cut it for me for the Hall of Fame ... and I do not find it even all that close.
Frankly, I think Mussina is a much better Hall of Fame candidate than is Schilling. And I am not even convinced he should be a slam dunk Hall of Famer. 3 of Mussina's most comparable peers are Hall of Famers (Marichal, Palmer and Hubbell) - though I think all 3 are distinctly, and even much, better than Mussina. Pettite is his most comparable eer - and Pettite has a chance at the Hall of Fame also - though I do not think HE deserves it (and not because of PED's - that does not disturb me all that much - mainly because of a VERY pedestrian ERA, and that he was really just a compiler ... and though he got 256 wins - which IS a lot - is that enough for a compiler ... maybe in this era it is). Mussina was a compiler also ... just 20 wins twice. On the other hand he was REGULARLY considered for the Cy Young (though he never won) - he finished in the top 6 in the Cy Young 9 times. His ERA was high for the Hall of Fame, in my opinion (3.68), but his ERA+ was 123 - pretty good. Mussina was also an exact contemporary of Schilling - and in the same league, mostly, as well ... but finished in the top 6 of the Cy Young voting 5 more tiems than did Schilling.
How can they continue to keep out Bobby Grich?Their all time disaster was in not letting in the best player of the 1960's until after he died-Ron Santo.
Really???? i hope you're kidding.
Santo was a very good player and have no problem with him in the Hall, but the best player of the 1960s? Wasn't even the best player on his team. That would be Billy Williams.
