Jump to content
DVDVR Message Board

The Baseball Hall of Fame Thread


LethalStriker

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, Serious Darius Bagfelt said:

Lenny Dykstra said if he took enough speed before a game the ball almost looked like it was coming at him in slow motion so it helped him.  And I'm sure he has taken a few pharmacies worth of stuff to know what works and what doesn't

Plus, there's also the fact that Adderall (which is the purest and most legal form of amphetamines) has become the PED of choice in sports since steroids became such a bad thing.

Still, with the failures there- this is going to be very interesting as the PED stuff and these failures this year come in. It is actually somehow conceivable the 2004 Red Sox, one of the more memorable teams in baseball history, may somehow see NO Hall of Famers on that roster. Even if you're not a Red Sox fan, at the beginning of the decade, that seemed unfathomable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I know for a long time most of the minor leaguers getting caught were pitchers..   it's pretty obvious damn near everyone was on something.  Look at all the random guys during that era who were hitting 30 and 40 home runs.  Just look at 2001 the year where Bonds breaks the record. 

You got Shawn Green hitting 49!  Luis Gonzalez hitting 57!  Phil Nevin with 41.  Richie Sexson with 45.   These aren't guys you are going to tell your grandkids about.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SorceressKnight said:

Plus, there's also the fact that Adderall (which is the purest and most legal form of amphetamines) has become the PED of choice in sports since steroids became such a bad thing.

Still, with the failures there- this is going to be very interesting as the PED stuff and these failures this year come in. It is actually somehow conceivable the 2004 Red Sox, one of the more memorable teams in baseball history, may somehow see NO Hall of Famers on that roster. Even if you're not a Red Sox fan, at the beginning of the decade, that seemed unfathomable.

Pedro Martinez is already in.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trevor Hoffman was 4 votes short

I haven't done the math yet - but since there were at least two blank ballots submitted I wonder if they cost him getting in this year.

EDIT - Okay, he would have been 3 votes short instead of 4 (going by the method of the blank ballots turned into just not submitted).

Even if they have been votes for him, he still would have been 2 short

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Manny Ramirez and Jeff Bagwell aren't worlds apart in terms of play and we can argue around in circles about who is actually better.  We're pretty much arguing whether Manny's defense was bad enough to take away from his all time great offense.  He was pretty bad in the field, not bad enough to be moved to DH, but not good.  I think all the other things Manny brought to the table make him a better candidate.  Manny was the best player in the most talked about World Series of our lives.  Manny was also someone who was a larger than life personality, who came up big in the biggest moments.  His post season numbers are much better than Bagwell's postseason numbers.  Manny Ramirez has moments that we'll remember forever, and in baseball more than any other sport that matters.  Jeff Bagwell was a great player offensively and defensively, there is not a single moment in his career anyone outside of Houston is talking about now, let alone forever.  

I can't wait to argue with you guys about A-Rod.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ryan said:

You must be young. The best in my lifetime was uh... *thinks up random person* Barry Bonds. ... Dammit!

It's an uncomfortable truth that the two best baseball players of our generation are the two least likable athletes of our generation.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a significantly different statement to say A-Rod was the 2nd best Position Player of the last 4 years (He is) and the Manny thing, for the record. And, my last note before i go to work, Manny's defense was atrocious enough that he SHOULD have been a DH most of his career, but wasn't because Boston already had Ortiz there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One theory: they wanted to vote for more than ten people and took a vote from bonds to vote for someone like Vlad or mussina. 

That apparently happens when people didnt vote for a lock candidate, because they were getting in anyway.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, supremebve said:

If that is the case...A-Rod is the 2nd best baseball player of my lifetime.  Only Barry Bonds was better.  

You'll get no argument on that from me. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Tabe said:

You'll get no argument on that from me. 

Apparently it is the least controversial thing I've ever said on here.  I honestly don't think its arguable at all, but A-Rod is about as polarizing of a figure as exists in sports.  I find that some people will say anything to discredit him, even when it makes no sense whatsoever. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, he's insanely unlikeable, but talentwise, there's no denying that, with or without juicing he had skills. If you take everyone in the league off of everything they were doing he'd still be near the top for most of his run.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Wyld Samurai said:

What's all this nonsense about A-Rod and Bonds being the best players of our lifetime when we had Ken Griffey Jr ruling the world in the 90s? He was so on top of the game that Bonds became an afterthought until he befriended Conte.

Ken Griffey Jr. is Kobe Bryant, Barry Bonds is Tim Duncan.  Kobe was a more spectacular player, but Tim Duncan was a better player.  Barry Bonds was better at almost everything than Ken Griffey Jr.  Barry Bonds won three MVPs in the 90s, before the steroids.  Griffey won one.  That should tell you who was better before we even talk about Bonds being a better hitter for average, having a better on base percentage, a better slugging percentage, striking out less, walking more, and stealing more bases.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
On 1/20/2017 at 2:48 PM, supremebve said:

SNIPPAGE>> Bonds being a better hitter for average, having a better on base percentage, a better slugging percentage, striking out less, walking more, and stealing more bases.

Just revisited this topic after checking out the spring training thread and was reminded that I meant to comment on this months ago... This last sentence is how you build a compelling argument regarding a player; well done! Now, please apply the same technique to Ramirez vs. Bagwell and see what you get. Manny was maybe your favorite player to watch, I get that; he was entertaining as hell (sometimes for the right reasons, sometimes for the wrong reasons). Bagwell was not an exciting player, you knew what you were going to get day in, day out. The thing is he was so good that people were spoiled watching him play. A similar situation with two of my favorite players (I am old, so I have had three or four favorites over the years), Eddie Murray and Matt Williams . No one will ever put Steady Eddie on the list of "exciting players", he wasn't, he just went about the business of being one of the best hitters the world has ever seen in a workman-like manner. If you were to say that Matt Williams' hardnosed style of play probably kept him from compiling HOF numbers, I would agree with you. Matty played every minute of every game like it was the ninth inning of game seven in the WS. He was an absolute joy to watch up until the last couple of years when injuries had taken their toll. He'll never get within shouting distance of the HOF, but I got to watch his whole career and the only other guy that I've seen play the hot corner so well was Graig Nettles (with a nod to Darrell Evans for being almost as good.) There's being "exciting" and there's being a HOFr. The bottom line is that the numbers don't lie. You have to look at the totality of a thing to determine truth, otherwise, you're simply being one of the blind men with the elephant. That's why arguments for Manny as a HOF ultimately do not hold water.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, OSJ said:

Just revisited this topic after checking out the spring training thread and was reminded that I meant to comment on this months ago... This last sentence is how you build a compelling argument regarding a player; well done! Now, please apply the same technique to Ramirez vs. Bagwell and see what you get. Manny was maybe your favorite player to watch, I get that; he was entertaining as hell (sometimes for the right reasons, sometimes for the wrong reasons). Bagwell was not an exciting player, you knew what you were going to get day in, day out. The thing is he was so good that people were spoiled watching him play. A similar situation with two of my favorite players (I am old, so I have had three or four favorites over the years), Eddie Murray and Matt Williams . No one will ever put Steady Eddie on the list of "exciting players", he wasn't, he just went about the business of being one of the best hitters the world has ever seen in a workman-like manner. If you were to say that Matt Williams' hardnosed style of play probably kept him from compiling HOF numbers, I would agree with you. Matty played every minute of every game like it was the ninth inning of game seven in the WS. He was an absolute joy to watch up until the last couple of years when injuries had taken their toll. He'll never get within shouting distance of the HOF, but I got to watch his whole career and the only other guy that I've seen play the hot corner so well was Graig Nettles (with a nod to Darrell Evans for being almost as good.) There's being "exciting" and there's being a HOFr. The bottom line is that the numbers don't lie. You have to look at the totality of a thing to determine truth, otherwise, you're simply being one of the blind men with the elephant. That's why arguments for Manny as a HOF ultimately do not hold water.

Manny is tricky, because I'll admit that Manny's HOF candidacy is based on narrative stuff.  Manny being the best player in what will go down as one of the most historically significant World Series should matter.  Manny being the scariest hitter in the sport not named Barry Bonds for a 5 year stretch should matter.  Being a player that fans were willing to pay to see should matter.  Jeff Bagwell was great, and I'd vote for him as a first ballot hall of famer if I had a vote, he just has none of the narrative stuff that should matter in a hall of "fame."  Look at it like this, how good was Derek Jeter? He was great, but what percentage of Jeter's legend is the narratives around Jeter?  If he played in Seattle or Milwaukee without any rings would he be a legendary figure or just a really good shortstop?  Manny was great, he played for a premier franchise, he was the best player in a world series that ended a 100+ year championship drought, and legitimately frightened everyone rooting for his opponent, and was a memorable character.  Manny is the exact type of player who should be immortalized in a museum about the game.  Bagwell is pretty much just another great player.  

Outside of the narrative stuff let's not pretend that Manny wasn't an insanely good player.  Bagwell was clearly the better defender, and his best offensive season was better than Manny's.  The thing is Manny's average season is closer to to Bagwell's best season than any other season in Bagwell's career.  Bagwell's best season.  H:  147  BA:  .368  HR:  39  RBI:  116.  Manny was a monsterous offensive player,between 1998 and 2005 these were Manny's averages:  H: 166  BA: .318  HR: 41  RBI:  130.  As good as Bagwell was, and he was outstanding, at his best as a hall of fame level hitter, he was just a little better than average Manny.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My friend, starting by saying that Manny's candidacy is based on narrative is not a good opening salvo. Be that as it may let's look at the points you bring up and see if we can quantify any of them. Again, unless we're on completely different pages (which I don't think we are), it all comes down to numbers which don't lie. 

"The best player in what will go down..." Okay, was he? What do the numbers say? How do we know that this will be considered significant by anyone outside of Boston?

"Scariest hitter in a 5 year stretch..." Okay, good, this is something that can be quantified. I won't even get snarky and ask "Who did he scare?" I'll assume that you mean opposing teams. There's a stat that answers this and you get a big tsk tsk from me for not using it... Intentional walks. No one wants to put a potential run on base unless the odds are good that said player may do you even more harm if you pitch to him. Barry's intentional walks are legendary, how do Manny's numbers compare?

"Being a player that fans were willing to pay to see should matter..." No, it really shouldn't. When I was a little kid there was a pitcher named Dick Radatz they called "The Monster", big scary guy that reminded me of Killer Kowalski. Was he that good? No, not really, but people got caught up in the hype and turned out to see him pitch. Ultimately, his name is known today only to baseball geeks like myself. 

Seeing that we're talking about Manny and by extension Bags, I'm not going to be distracted into a side conversation about Derek Jeter. (See kids, some of that shit you learn in debate class stays with you!)

Okay, if you're going to cherry-pick numbers, it would be helpful to notice which help your case and which don't, with all the more advanced stats that we have at our disposal you want to use just the bare bones basics, okay, I'll bite... Please note, .368 is not "similar" to .318, batting average is a totally overrated stat, but if we're going to discuss it, let's please understand that a fifty point swing is not "close", it's barely in the same universe. 

I love this sort of discussion, so if you want to try again with some numbers, I'm your huckleberry. ;-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 7 months later...

The ballot has been mailed and the names who officially made the ballot were released

Quote

1st Time on Ballot (in alphabetical order)

Chris Carpenter
Johnny Damon
Livan Hernandez
Orlando Hudson
Aubrey Huff
Andruw Jones
Chipper Jones
Jason Isringhausen
Carlos Lee
Brad Lidge
Hideki Matsui
Kevin Millwood
Jamie Moyer
Scott Rolen
Johan Santana
Jim Thome
Omar Vizquel
Kerry Wood
Carlos Zambrano

Returners (alpha order) - last year's percentage noted

Barry Bonds (53.8)
Roger Clemens (54.1)
Vladimir Guerrero (71.1)
Trevor Hoffman (74.0)
Jeff Kent (16.7)
Edgar Martinez (58.6)
Fred McGriff (21.7)
Mike Mussina (51.8)
Manny Ramirez (23.8)
Curt Schilling (45.0)
Gary Sheffield (13.3)
Sammy Sosa (8.6)
Billy Wagner (10.2)
Larry Walker (21.9)

Class will be announced Jan 24, 2018

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...