Your New Bright and Shiny HOF Thread

[OSJ]

Jimmy Edmonds is one of the finest players I've ever seen, that he isn't in the HOF is a travesty and an indictment that the BBWA don't know what they are seeing over half the time.  Odd, but  I find two of my guys that I constantly bang on about on the list, well make that three... Indian Bob Johnson, Minnie Minoso, and Reggie Smith. Time has not been kind to Reggie Smith, the numbers he put up in a pitcher dominated era are astonishing, but the "other" Reggie got all the ink and Smith, a quiet man who went about his business with a deadly efficiency was forgotten. Bob Johnson should have been inducted years ago, the man is long since dead and can't enjoy the honor now, but I imagine he has family that would like to see this fifty+ year oversight corrected. Minoso should be in, I don't give a damn about what the stats say, he didn't hit the majors until he was almost 24 (and I suspect that he was older than that), but managed to put together an awesome, if somewhat short career. Considering that he lost who knows how many years to the color barrier, (I'll go out on a limb here and say that I've always thought he was closer to 27 than 23 when he debuted, meaning that he left six to eight seasons of prime production back in the Negro Leagues.) I can't prove it, so we have to go with what we know, and what we know is a brilliant career, somewhat truncated. He belongs.

[odessasteps]

The eight candidates who will be considered by the Classic Baseball Era Committee are Dick Allen, Ken Boyer, John Donaldson, Steve Garvey, Vic Harris, Tommy John, Dave Parker and Luis Tiant.

The Classic Baseball Era Committee will vote Dec. 8, with the results to be announced that night live on MLB Network.

[Ace]

So Garvey can lose twice in one year.

[Dolfan in NYC]

The 2025 Hall of Fame ballot:

Ichiro better land north of 98%.  

[Kuetsar]

3 hours ago, Dolfan in NYC said:

The 2025 Hall of Fame ballot:

Ichiro better land north of 98%.  

Other than him, and the two roiders, looks like a lot of hall of good or very good to me.

[Nice Guy Eddie]

12 minutes ago, Kuetsar said:

Other than him, and the two roiders, looks like a lot of hall of good or very good to me.

I think Ichiro, Felix Hernandez, and CC Sabathia get in on the first ballot. Throw out Manny and A-Rod, and yeah, that's a lot of Hall of very good players. 

[Kuetsar]

13 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

I think Ichiro, Felix Hernandez, and CC Sabathia get in on the first ballot. Throw out Manny and A-Rod, and yeah, that's a lot of Hall of very good players. 

CC's stats were better than I thought( though I'd still have him out), but the only Felix should get in is with a ticket. 

Edited November 19, 2024 by Kuetsar

[Tabe]

4 hours ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

I think Ichiro, Felix Hernandez, and CC Sabathia get in on the first ballot. Throw out Manny and A-Rod, and yeah, that's a lot of Hall of very good players. 

I would be stunned if Felix gets in. 

If we've decided that closers belong in the Hall - a decision I'm not sold on - the Billy Wagner goes in. In 15 seasons, he had an ERA over 3.00 once - a year he was injured. His ERA was under 2.00 six times. 

Andruw Jones will get in eventually. 

[Stefanie Sparkleface]

Felix is in the same situation as Dave Stieb - phenomenally talented, just on a bad team for nearly all of his career.

[Tabe]

8 hours ago, Stefanie Sparkleface said:

Felix is in the same situation as Dave Stieb - phenomenally talented, just on a bad team for nearly all of his career.

Stieb played 15 years in the majors - we'll ignore his 5-minute comeback in 1998 - and his teams had a winning record in 11 of them. And were basically .500 in another. Toronto was terrible for a few years after their formation but became good - and then stayed that way. 

[Stefanie Sparkleface]

1 hour ago, Tabe said:

Stieb played 15 years in the majors - we'll ignore his 5-minute comeback in 1998 - and his teams had a winning record in 11 of them. And were basically .500 in another. Toronto was terrible for a few years after their formation but became good - and then stayed that way. 

I don't know how much a team's winning record helps out when they give him practically no run support during the period where he was most dominant (1980-1985). By the time they caught up to actually scoring when he was holding teams to 1-2 runs a game, his arm basically fell off. The Jays went 99-61 in 1985, and for Stieb's 2.48 ERA, he was still 14-13 because his team wasn't actually knocking in runs to help him. He started 36 games that year and only had one game where his ERA was above 3, and that was a win!

It'd be amazing to think of 1980-1985 Stieb getting the run support he got from 1988-1990.

EDIT TO ADD: This is a pretty solid article covering why Stieb's record was what it was (albeit compared to Jack Morris): https://mopupduty.com/the-dave-stieb-vs-jack-morris-hall-of-fame-debate-1244/

Edited November 20, 2024 by Stefanie Sparkleface

[odessasteps]

Ichiro won’t likely be a unanimous pick, but just imagine if his NPB stats “counted.” 
 

/totally biased opinion

[Cobra Commander]

fun with splits, Stieb edition: 10-1 record with 1.42 ERA over 13 starts (14 games) at the original Comiskey Park. Stieb having pitched in College at Southern Illinois. So, just imagine the scenario where he starts with the White Sox. Instead of pitching there when he's 35

[Tabe]

14 hours ago, Stefanie Sparkleface said:

I don't know how much a team's winning record helps out when they give him practically no run support during the period where he was most dominant (1980-1985). By the time they caught up to actually scoring when he was holding teams to 1-2 runs a game, his arm basically fell off. The Jays went 99-61 in 1985, and for Stieb's 2.48 ERA, he was still 14-13 because his team wasn't actually knocking in runs to help him. He started 36 games that year and only had one game where his ERA was above 3, and that was a win!

It'd be amazing to think of 1980-1985 Stieb getting the run support he got from 1988-1990.

EDIT TO ADD: This is a pretty solid article covering why Stieb's record was what it was (albeit compared to Jack Morris): https://mopupduty.com/the-dave-stieb-vs-jack-morris-hall-of-fame-debate-1244/

None of what you said changes the fact the Jays weren't a bad team for most of his career. 

[Stefanie Sparkleface]

1 hour ago, Tabe said:

None of what you said changes the fact the Jays weren't a bad team for most of his career. 

Last, last, next to last, fourth, second, first, fourth, second, third, first, second. That’s the Jays placement from 1980 to 1990, which was his prime. If he had any kind of run support a couple of those seconds would be firsts and they’d be a better team.

I’m fine with agreeing to disagree here but I firmly believe just being above .500 doesn’t make you good. You actually have to win something; the Jays didn’t until Stieb was toast.

[Nice Guy Eddie]

14 hours ago, odessasteps said:

Ichiro won’t likely be a unanimous pick, but just imagine if his NPB stats “counted.” 
 

/totally biased opinion

Ichiro won't be unanimous because some moron writer will hold his NPB experience against him and how he technically wasn't a rookie in 2001, eventhough he won rookie of the year. 

On a side rant, Hideki Matsui was absolutely robbed of the ROY in 2003 because his Japan experience was held against him when Ichiro won ROY in 2001. The winner of the 2003 AL Rookie of the year? Kansas City's Angel Berroa. 

[Tabe]

1 hour ago, Stefanie Sparkleface said:

Last, last, next to last, fourth, second, first, fourth, second, third, first, second. That’s the Jays placement from 1980 to 1990, which was his prime. If he had any kind of run support a couple of those seconds would be firsts and they’d be a better team.

I’m fine with agreeing to disagree here but I firmly believe just being above .500 doesn’t make you good. You actually have to win something; the Jays didn’t until Stieb was toast.

You're moving the goalposts. You said they were a "bad team for nearly all of his career". That's objectively false. Bad teams don't finish above .500 eleven straight years, the last 11 of his time with Toronto. In those 11 years, Toronto won five division titles and two Worlds Series. And they finished second twice, to two historically great Tigers teams. How is a team that finished first or second in nearly half of his seasons, a "bad team for nearly all of his career"? 

[Stefanie Sparkleface]

5 minutes ago, Tabe said:

You're moving the goalposts. You said they were a "bad team for nearly all of his career". That's objectively false. Bad teams don't finish above .500 eleven straight years, the last 11 of his time with Toronto. In those 11 years, Toronto won five division titles and two Worlds Series. And they finished second twice, to two historically great Tigers teams. How is a team that finished first or second in nearly half of his seasons, a "bad team for nearly all of his career"? 

As I’ve said, good teams actually win something, and I’ve explained my logic as to why I felt the Jays were not a good team. It comes down to run support and winning when it matters; the Jays did neither for Stieb from 1980 to 1990 (and I cite those years specifically because that was before Stieb notably regressed due to injury… he did have better run support from 1988 to 1990 but that just brought him up to the league average, whoop dee doo). The World Series wins were not in those years and I’ve never brought them up.

Once again, we’re going to have to agree to disagree here, because you’re not going to change my mind by saying something is “objectively false” when I’ve already explained why I don’t feel that’s the case.

[Kevin Wilson]

Very slightly on topic but when looking at stats/Hall of Fame consideration, etc. it feels pretty unfair for players pre-1994 when there was no wildcard. How many good to great players could have had that memorable playoff run or big World Series win if there was more opportunities to get there. I almost feel like post-season accolades should be graded on a curve, current players just have so many more opportunities to impress in October now than they used to. The 1993 Giants won 103 games and missed the playoffs! Its nutty looking at it with 2024 eyes.

[Stefanie Sparkleface]

16 minutes ago, Kevin Wilson said:

Very slightly on topic but when looking at stats/Hall of Fame consideration, etc. it feels pretty unfair for players pre-1994 when there was no wildcard. How many good to great players could have had that memorable playoff run or big World Series win if there was more opportunities to get there. I almost feel like post-season accolades should be graded on a curve, current players just have so many more opportunities to impress in October now than they used to. The 1993 Giants won 103 games and missed the playoffs! Its nutty looking at it with 2024 eyes.

Agreed, there are a lot of players that were really good but the chance to compete via wildcard entry would've made their case even more, because they were hot in the leadup to the end of the season but didn't make the LCS, so they never had a chance to do anything with that momentum. That's especially the case when one division is more loaded than another, like you mentioned. (This is where I sideeye at the Jays in 1989, where they made it to the ALCS but were the fourth best team in the AL by record since the Royals and Angels had better records, they just happened to be behind a really really good Oakland team.)

[Cobra Commander]

55 minutes ago, Kevin Wilson said:

Very slightly on topic but when looking at stats/Hall of Fame consideration, etc. it feels pretty unfair for players pre-1994 when there was no wildcard. How many good to great players could have had that memorable playoff run or big World Series win if there was more opportunities to get there. I almost feel like post-season accolades should be graded on a curve, current players just have so many more opportunities to impress in October now than they used to. The 1993 Giants won 103 games and missed the playoffs! Its nutty looking at it with 2024 eyes.

imagine all that pre-2002 "Barry Bonds playoff woes" talk that could have been avoided

[Tabe]

2 hours ago, Stefanie Sparkleface said:

As I’ve said, good teams actually win something, and I’ve explained my logic as to why I felt the Jays were not a good team. It comes down to run support and winning when it matters; the Jays did neither for Stieb from 1980 to 1990 (and I cite those years specifically because that was before Stieb notably regressed due to injury… he did have better run support from 1988 to 1990 but that just brought him up to the league average, whoop dee doo). The World Series wins were not in those years and I’ve never brought them up.

Once again, we’re going to have to agree to disagree here, because you’re not going to change my mind by saying something is “objectively false” when I’ve already explained why I don’t feel that’s the case.

Like I said, you moved the goalposts. "bad" and "not good" are not the same thing. And lots of good teams don't win. The Seattle Mariners won 116 games. It would be silly to say they weren't good and, therefore by your definition, bad. Or winning 97 games and missing a division title by 1 game because your All-Star shortstop gets his arm broken by a dirty slide means you're a "bad" team. 

Winning 5 division titles is also "winning something". 

Again, I struggle to see how winning 91 games a year makes a team "bad" - your word, not mine. 

[Tabe]

1 hour ago, Kevin Wilson said:

Very slightly on topic but when looking at stats/Hall of Fame consideration, etc. it feels pretty unfair for players pre-1994 when there was no wildcard. How many good to great players could have had that memorable playoff run or big World Series win if there was more opportunities to get there. I almost feel like post-season accolades should be graded on a curve, current players just have so many more opportunities to impress in October now than they used to. The 1993 Giants won 103 games and missed the playoffs! Its nutty looking at it with 2024 eyes.

Ted Williams got one shot at the playoffs in his career and bombed because he was hurt. Imagine Teddy Ballgame getting even 3 or 4 more chances. 

[odessasteps]

Yeah, all the “playoff total” numbers are almost all totally skewed toward the modern players.  A position player in baseball could probably get close to 100 AB in one year if his team went the distance in every round . An NHL player could get 28 games in his team played in 4 game 7’s. Compared to the pre-expansion years when you had a 7 game postseason max in baseball and hockey and probably basketball. 

[RIPPA]

I would say that somewhere, now OSJ is happy but we all know that wasn't his style