The W
Views: 99983701
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Calendar | Color chart | Log in for more!
24.10.14 0711
The W - Baseball - Hall of Fame (Page 2)
This thread has 34 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 Next(1649 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (57 total)
Bullitt
Shot in the dark








Since: 11.1.02
From: Houston

Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 1 day
#21 Posted on
Carter deserves to be in, if only so he'll stop his bloody whining...which seems to get worse every year.

Don't get me wrong, I grew up an Expos fan in the Carter-Dawson-Raines-Wallach era.

And my man Tim Wallach got *1* vote for the Hall.



Q: If you could have interviewed Marvin Gaye, where would you have proposed to meet and what would you have asked him?

A: I would have met anywhere as long as it was before his father shot him. I would have asked him, "Hey, don't you think there's some chance that your father might shoot you? To death, I mean?"
pieman
As young as
he feels








Since: 11.12.01
From: China, Maine

Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 16 hours
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#22 Posted on | Instant Rating: 8.21
Jayson Stark is a comedian. He know just enough to be dangerous and he has a national stage at ESPN. If you want to read people who know something about baseball, stick with Rob Neyer and the guys at Baseball Prospectus - Chris Kahrl, Joe Sheehan, Rany Jazayerli, Clay Davenport, etc.



He's Rolie Polie Olie - and in his world of curves and curls, he's the swellest kid around.
BigDaddyLoco
Scrapple








Since: 2.1.02

Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 11 hours
#23 Posted on
Blyleven doesn't deserve to be in the Hall. He was a good pitcher, but that's it good. He was never the top guy on his team. He never really pitched in big games. He just has longevity on his side.

On the flip side Jack Morris should be in the Hall, because he was a big game pitcher. He was the teams go to guy and he delivered when it mattered most...the big games.

I would have gone for:
Smith
Carter
Morris
Dawson

Next year Eddie Murray baby!



thecubsfan
Scrapple
Moderator








Since: 10.12.01
From: Aurora, IL

Since last post: 17 hours
Last activity: 6 hours
#24 Posted on

Eddie Murray's going to be an intersting trial baloon - isn't he the first (mostly-)DH canadiate? His candicacy is gonna be less about what he did, and more a debate on the worthyness of DH's at all, and what benchmarks they need to be considered.

All's that a roundabout way of saying I wouldn't reserve hotel space to be at Murray's induction cermony next year - and maybe the year after that.



.
cfgb
Lap cheong








Since: 2.1.02
From: Ottawa, Ontario

Since last post: 19 hours
Last activity: 52 min.
#25 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.87
Eddie Murray? You're talking about a guy who had a bunch of average - good seasons which lead to 3000 hits. He got lucky in that he was never or rarily hurt, and managed to find playing time every single day.

I wouldn't be surprised if alot of writers don't give him a second thought because of the fact that he was never impressive, just good, and like Cubs mentioned, he was a DH.

Not to mention, I don't have the stats in front of me, but I don't think he had much All Star time...




Contact cfgb
Visit my homepage
thecubsfan
Scrapple
Moderator








Since: 10.12.01
From: Aurora, IL

Since last post: 17 hours
Last activity: 6 hours
#26 Posted on

Bored bored bored - the worst part about having no life and recapping Jakked (though I don't think the two are mutually exclusive, nope) is that when it gets bumped to 4AM and you're up at 2, do you wait up?

thanks to: Baseball Reference

21 Seasons
504 HR (avg 24 a season, career high 33)
1917 RBI
.287 BA (.359 OBP/.476 SLG)
2 Sacrifice Bunts!

AL ROY (1977)
AL 1B Gold Glove (82, 83, 84)
No AL MVPs, but 6 times in the top 5 (AL: 81 (5), 82 (2), 83 (2), 84 (4), 85 (5); NL: 90 (5))

Based on being considered as a TOP guy for 5 years running (and not completely falling apart for most of the other 16), he's got a strong case.

Interstingly enough, this is his top 10 similar list

Dave Winfield (885) *
Carl Yastrzemski (833) *
Al Kaline (796) *
Frank Robinson (788) *
Harold Baines (774)
Mel Ott (771) *
Reggie Jackson (770) *
Cal Ripken Jr. (742)
Tony Perez (726) *
Andre Dawson (725)

All the * guys are in, Ripken will be in, Dawson's gonna be at least talked about for more years - but the comparison with Baines (who wasn't voted as a top person in his league nearly as much) is gonna be the one he wants to avoid.



.
cfgb
Lap cheong








Since: 2.1.02
From: Ottawa, Ontario

Since last post: 19 hours
Last activity: 52 min.
#27 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.87
I was actually going to compare him to Cal Ripken initially, but realized by doing so it would be counter productive to my argument that Murray SHOULDN'T be in - seeing as how Cal is more or less a lock.

Cal's defence was good - great depending on the year. Murray doesn't have that added benefit. On top of that, Cal the letters MVP next to his name, as well as that streak. Murray was a poor man's Cal Ripken who required someone to catch the ball for him.

Harold Baines is a GREAT guy to place Murray in the same category with. A good player year in and year out who's great to have plugged in to the middle of your lineup and will NEVER be noticed.

And as blasphemous as this is gonna sound, I find Baines to be the better hitter of the two.

I'll end with this... If we let Eddie Murray into the hall of fame, where do we stop? Fred McGriff will clearly deserve a pass. After all, he has good career numbers AND he played first to boot! What about Albert Belle? And even Harold Baines...

Hall Of Fame is a touchy subject. Especially considering we're on the cusp of entering the era of inflated batting stats, and different numbers for the pitchers.




Contact cfgb
Visit my homepage
Guru Zim
SQL Dejection
Administrator








Since: 9.12.01
From: Bay City, OR

Since last post: 6 hours
Last activity: 6 hours
AIM:  
#28 Posted on
I don't like to be a numbers guy... because really the numbers are deceiving between eras.

That said, you just can't ignore 3000 / 500. Can you?

25 guys (today) at 3000 or above...

From 77 - 87 it was a different era for power hitters than what we see today. 30 Home runs used to be important, not a role player on the team...

I'm torn. I don't like the DH, I don't like people getting in on DH numbers, but how do you pass up on him?

Will a guy like Edgar Martinez even get a look in 4 or 5 years, assuming he gets another batting title and keeps his OBP around .400? I can see Edgar hitting over 300 homers, 2500 hits, a few batting titles... and dropping off the list in his first year. Is that fair?


//edit: assuming 4 or 5 years of playing time, not the 5 years til he gets reviewed...


I love it when a plan comes together

(edited by Guru Zim on 13.1.02 0117)
cfgb
Lap cheong








Since: 2.1.02
From: Ottawa, Ontario

Since last post: 19 hours
Last activity: 52 min.
#29 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.87
That said, you just can't ignore 3000 / 500. Can you?

As scary as it is, 500 homeruns CAN'T guarantee a pass anymore. Take a look at what's coming! Sammy Sosa has averaged 60 homeruns over the course of the past 4 years. That's TWO HUNDRED AND FOURTY freakin' homeruns in 4 years! On that pace, that's 500 in just 9.

Offense is up like never before.

Now, Murray DID just miss the offensive boom. Barely. If he gets in, it's because of the fact he did put up those numbers in his era over the span of 20 years. Even as a DH.

But 3000/500 isn't going to be an automatic entry anymore very soon... When you consider Shawn Green batted 50 over the wall last season and no one blinked, some long standing hall prerequisites are going to need changing.




Contact cfgb
Visit my homepage
Java
Goetta








Since: 2.1.02
From: Chandler, AZ

Since last post: 360 days
Last activity: 7 hours
#30 Posted on
I have to agree with you cfgb, that 500 homers cannot assume a pass anymore, but you have to look at the numbers in the context of when they were accomplished, not in the time period of the voting. Most of Murray's 500 homers came when NO one was hitting 50, or usually even 40 homers a year.

As for the DH debate, I am not a fan of the DH, but Murray played most of his career at first, with only the last 3-4 as DH, so I don't think he will be the player to have the great DH debate about. That player will probably be Baines or Canseco (no, I don't think either should get in).
thecubsfan
Scrapple
Moderator








Since: 10.12.01
From: Aurora, IL

Since last post: 17 hours
Last activity: 6 hours
#31 Posted on

>That said, you just can't ignore 3000 / 500. Can you?

Canseco has 462 HRs at age 37. He will likely get 500 - that's all he's playing for, he's said many times, because he believes 500 gets him in, and he's gonna be cheap enough that someone will pick him up to platoon, at least. Canseco has one MVP, one more than Murray.

There's no way Jose Canseco is getting in, you know?



.
andy1278
Linguica








Since: 11.1.02
From: Brunswick, GA

Since last post: 663 days
Last activity: 637 days
AIM:  
#32 Posted on
I'd love to see Dale Murphy make it in somehow, but I think a lot of that stems from being a Braves fan through the years.



Andy Online
squiz
Salami








Since: 5.1.02
From: Dover, NH

Since last post: 1121 days
Last activity: 224 days
AIM:  
#33 Posted on
I keep seeing that Eddie Murray was a DH, and as such his stats should be taken with a grain of salt. Well, after some very quick research, here's some of his fielding stats:

Games at 1B - 2413
Games as DH - 573

So he was mainly a 1B. He was a DH in 1977, his rookie year, but the first year he was a DH for the majority of a year after that was 1994, his first with Cleveland, when he was 38. But from 1978-1993, he played less than 149 games at fist in a season only 3 times, one being the strike shortened 1981 season.

He lead the AL in fielding percentage twice, once in the NL with the Dodgers. Throughout the rest of his he was a very consistant fielder. Again, from 1978 to 1993, his fielding average was below .991 only 4 times.

So to say he was just a DH is just plain wrong.

And when the above is added to the fact he was selected to the All-Star team 8 times, and is 12th all time in hits, 8th in RBI, and did hit 504 HR in a time when that was amazing, and played consistantly good baseball for 20 years, he would easily get my vote.



"You can see a million miles tonight, but you can't get very far."
- Adam Duritz
BigDaddyLoco
Scrapple








Since: 2.1.02

Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 11 hours
#34 Posted on
The fact that Murray got most of his stats right before the offensive boom should mean something, and I agree that he should be considered a 1st baseman.

As for Edgar Martinez...well the fact that I'm a Mariner fan and he is one of my alltime favorite players is enough for me to vote him in. But if baseball wants to consider the DH a true position than I think that voting the best DH of all time in the Hall is important. Edgar is one of the first guys to become a full time DH. One way to look at it would be Griffey's numbers. With Edgar protecting Griffey, Griffey's numbers soared. But while Edgar was hurt or now that Griffey doesn't have that protection he isn't seeing the pitches he once did.

I would vote Edgar in on the basis that he is the best DH to ever play the game and he really is the backbone of the batting lineup.



Guru Zim
SQL Dejection
Administrator








Since: 9.12.01
From: Bay City, OR

Since last post: 6 hours
Last activity: 6 hours
AIM:  
#35 Posted on
Here's the Murray problem in a nutshell:

If you take his numbers as a first baseman (basically, take the stats from 1994-1997 out) you aren't looking at HOF numbers...

435 fewer hits - or 2820
63 fewer HR - or 441.

Here is his OBP for the last few seasons:

1994: .375
1995: .327
1996: .327
1997: .281

Would that have flown anywhere else during those years? Add that to the lack of a real team presence (he floated during his last few years) and you have a problem.

It really looks to me like he padded his numbers, just like Canseco is...



I love it when a plan comes together
pieman
As young as
he feels








Since: 11.12.01
From: China, Maine

Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 16 hours
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#36 Posted on | Instant Rating: 8.21
A bunch of my friends have been having the HOF argument over the last week or so and it has gotten contentious concerning Bert Blyleven. I will try to cut and paste parts of an email I sent to them:


I have a hard time with this "he wasn't the go to guy."

1973 - Bert goes 20-7, 2.52 with the rest of the rotation: Jim Kaat (11-12, 4.41), Joe Decker and Dick Woodson. Who you going to there?

1974 - Bert (17-7, 2.62) with Joe Decker, Dave Goltz, Vic Albury and Ray Corbin.

1975 - Bert (15-10, 3.00) with Jim Hughes, Goltz and Corbin.

Let's skip ahead to 1978 - Bert (14-10, 3.03) with Don Robinson (14-6, 3.47), John Candelaria (12-11, 3.24), Jim Rooker (9-11, 4.24) and Jerry Reuss (3-2, 4.90).

1984 - Bert (19-7, 2.87) with Neal Heaton (12-15, 5.21!!), Steve Comer (4-8, 5.68), Steve Farr (3-11, 4.58) and Rick Sutcliffe (4-5, 5.15).

Even at the end of his career - 1989 - Bert (17-5, 2.73) - with Mike Witt, Kirk McCaskill, Chuck Finley and Jim Abbott.

In every one of these years, he led his team in innings pitched and he clearly was the #1 starter on nearly every team he pitched for. I picked 6 years scattered throughout his career. He was the man.

Maybe I'm related to him. And I think he's the only Major Leaguer ever born in Zeist, Holland.






He's Rolie Polie Olie - and in his world of curves and curls, he's the swellest kid around.
cfgb
Lap cheong








Since: 2.1.02
From: Ottawa, Ontario

Since last post: 19 hours
Last activity: 52 min.
#37 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.87
Blyleven is also the only man to give up 50 dingers in a season...

Whoops, that's not a good thing is it? ;-)

Blyleven's another "face in the crowd". Very good does not make great. Will not be able to sway 75% of the voters.




Contact cfgb
Visit my homepage
pieman
As young as
he feels








Since: 11.12.01
From: China, Maine

Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 16 hours
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#38 Posted on | Instant Rating: 8.21
Oh, I know that, Chris. I have only convinced one of my friends (out of the ten that I am trying to convince). We have a special place for Bert in the HOVG (the Hall of the Very Good).



He's Rolie Polie Olie - and in his world of curves and curls, he's the swellest kid around.
Eddie Famous
Andouille








Since: 11.12.01
From: Catlin IL

Since last post: 335 days
Last activity: 329 days
#39 Posted on

Oh for crying out loud.

Eddie Murray is a first ballot HOF member as the most productive switch-hitter in baseball history.

He was what, one good season away from 2000 RBI?

And so wht if you might think he was mainly an offensive player (which stats show he wasn't). Smith and maz were defensive players, as was Aparicio and Fox.

Mantle and Williams were subbed for often in the last half of their careers...

Padded numbers? Almost 2000 RBI's? C'mon folks.



***Optioned to Pawtucket (IL), April 6***

BigDaddyLoco
Scrapple








Since: 2.1.02

Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 11 hours
#40 Posted on
I still think Jack Morris is a better canadate than Blyleven. What was Bert's overall record? era? and total years played anyway. You can't vote him in without opening the flood gates.
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 Next
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 NextThread ahead: Harry Kalas -- HOF
Next thread: Red Sox
Previous thread: While on the topic of hall of fame...
(1649 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
While history's record book will forever disagree with me (as well as the Dmitri Young superfans)...that was *not* a single.
- Joseph Ryder, 2007 All-Star Game (2007)
The W - Baseball - Hall of Fame (Page 2)Register and log in to post!

The W™ message board

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim

This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.235 seconds.